'O.fT.  0 


^  tut  lltwiogtai  ^ 

^V  PRINCETON,  N.  J.  **fh 


Purchased   by  the 
Mrs.   Robert   Lenox   Kennedy  Church    History   Fund. 


'^- 


/~ 


Lollardy  and  the  Reformation  in  England 


j^o^m. 


MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,   Limited 

LONDON  ■  BOMBAY  •  CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE    MACMILLAN     COMPANY 

NEW   YORK   •   BOSTON   •   CHICAGO 
ATLANTA   •    SAN    FRANCISCO 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.   OF  CANADA,   Ltd. 

TORONTO 


Lollardy  and  theK  ^ct  5  190c 


Reformation  in  England 


An   Historical   Survey 


BY 


JAMES    GAIRDNER,    C.B. 


HON.  LL.D.   EDIN. 


VOL.  II 


MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,  LIMITED 

ST.  MARTIN'S  STREET,  LONDON 

I  908 


CONTENTS 

BOOK    III 
THE  FALL  OF  THE  MONASTERIES 

CHAPTEE    I 

PAGE 

Further  Trials  of  the  Faithful  ....         3 

CHAPTEE    II 

Visitation  and  Suppression  of  Monasteries  .  .       44 

CHAPTEE    III 

Further  Proceedings  against  Monasteries — and  against 

Superstitions  ......     107 

CHAPTEE    IV 

German  Protestantism  and  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles     170 

BOOK    IV 
THE  EEIGN  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE 

CHAPTEE    I 

The  Story  of  the  English  Bible  .  .  .  .221 

V 


vi       LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


CHAPTER    II 

PAGE 

The  Making  of  FokmoIiARIes  ....     304 


CHAPTER    III 

Katharine  Pakr  and  the  New  Learning  .  .357 

CHAPTER    IV 

Eesults  under  Henry  VIII.  ....     467 

INDEX  .......     483 


BOOK  III 
THE   FALL   OF   THE   MONASTERIES 


VOL.  II 


CHAPTER   I 

FURTHER    TRIALS    OF    THE    FAITHFUL 

More's  writings,  we  may  well  believe,  were  not 
altogether  ineffective  in  the  discouragement  of  heresy, 
although  it  was  so  much  encouraged  by  the  Court. 
It  was,  no  doubt,  essential  to  the  King's  purpose  that 
the  Pope  and  the  clergy  should  be  reviled  and  their 
authority  impugned  as  much  as  possible.  But  this 
did  not  make  the  divorce  of  Katharine  or  the  marriage 
with  Anne  Boleyn  more  popular ;  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  Act  of  Supremacy,  though  it  made 
resistance  hopeless,  did  not  reconcile  Henry's  subjects 
to  an  unprecedented  breach  in  the  unity  of  Christen- 
dom. On  the  contrary,  it  aroused  a  deep  sympathy  Resent- 
with  the  patient  victims   of  tyranny,  of  which  the  ^^^^^^ , 

Tr-  1  •       ^li-  ^1  •  1   the  Kings 

ilmg  nimselt  was  not  by  any  means  unconscious  ;  and  tyranny. 
the  leading  note  of  his  whole  policy  from  that  time 
was  an  effort  to  convince  himself  and  others  that  in 
throwing  off  his  allegiance  to  Rome  he  was  merely 
vindicating  the  independence  of  his  realm,  and  that 
he  made  no  breach  whatever  in  the  spiritual  unity  of 
Christendom.  He  had  his  own  spiritual  advisers  in 
his  own  kingdom,  and  whatever  was  done  as  regards 
religion  and  the  faith  was  done  after  full  consultation 
with  them.  Nor  did  either  he  or  they  impugn  one 
vital  doctrine. 

To  vindicate  this  position,  while  it  was  necessary, 
for  the  sake  of  his  policy,  to  put  to  cruel  deaths  the 
most  saintly  men  in  his  kingdom,  was  of  course  not 

3 


4   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

an  easy  matter ;  and,  in  fact,  the  very  cause  which 
led  him  on  to  his  peculiar  line  of  action  had  become 
the  greatest  obstacle  to  its  success.  "  Thou  art  the 
cause  of  this  man's  death,"  he  might  very  well  say  to 
Anne  Boleyn  of  Sir  Thomas  More ;  only  he  should 
have  blamed  his  own  infatuated  passion  rather  than 
the  poor  weak  woman  who  at  first  had  really  with- 
stood its  vehemence  for  a  considerable  time.  But  she, 
or  her  influence,  was  undoubtedly  the  cause  of  the 
death,  not  only  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  but  of  Bishop 
Fisher  and  Eeynolds  and  the  three  Carthusian  priors. 
Nor  was  the  legal  butchery  even  yet  at  an  end, 
though  the  passion  for  Anne  Boleyn  had  long  been 
on  the  wane ;  for  the  law,  however  tyrannical,  must 
be  upheld,  else  respect  for  him  who  got  it  passed 
would  very  soon  pass  away.  It  was  no  secret  to  him, 
nevertheless,  that  he  had  greatly  lost  the  esteem  and 
affection  of  his  subjects ;  he  could  not  be  ignorant  of 
that,  when  he  was  ruling  by  terror  and  not  by  love. 
Yet  he  could  not  have  imagined — what  was  unknown 
till  our  own  day — how  privy  conspiracy,  even  among 
the  courtiers  whom  he  least  suspected,  was  endeavour- 
ing to  procure  an  invasion  of  the  kingdom. ^ 

As  a  means  of  establishing  better  feelings  between 
him  and  his  subjects  the  sacrifice  of  Anne  Boleyn 
was  sure  to  take  place  before  many  years  were  over. 
Arrogance  Her  iudiscretious  and  her  insolences  aggravated  the 
Bokyn!  general  feeling  against  her.  Even  her  uncle,  Norfolk, 
spoke  of  her  with  utter  disgust.^  She  hated  the 
Princess  Mary,  and  even  ventured  to  tell  the  King 
he  would  have  to  get  rid  of  her  one  day,  as  he  had 
got  rid  of  Bishop  Fisher.  "  She  will  be  my  death  or 
I  hers,"  she  would  say ;  "  but  I  will  take  care  that 
she  shall  not  laugh  at  me  after  I  am  dead."  ^ 

This  insolence  of  an  upstart  for  whose  sake  the 
old  order  of  Church  and  State  had  been  completely 

^  See  L.  P.,  VIII.  Pref.,  pp.  ii.  iii. 
2  L.  P.,  VIII.  1.  3  L.  P.,  IX.  873. 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL       5 

subverted  did  not  make  men  warm  upholders  of 
change  in  matters  of  religion.  Even  before  royal 
supremacy  over  the  Church  had  been  vindicated  by 
such  cruel  martyrdoms  there  was  deep  disaffection 
everywhere.  Lord  Hussey  and  Lord  Darcy  had  been 
eager  to  inform  the  Imperial  ambassador  in  secret  secret  dis- 
that  everybody  in  England  would  gladly  welcome  an  ^iobiemen° 
invasion  by  the  Emperor,  even  to  rescue  from  danger 
Queen  Katharine  and  her  daughter  Mary,  and  restore 
them  to  their  proper  positions  as  queen  and  princess. 
Indeed,  Darcy  was  confident  that  he  could  raise  the 
North  against  the  Lutheran  policy  that  the  King 
seemed  bent  on  pursuing ;  and  if  the  King  of  Scots 
at  the  same  time  would  invade  the  northern  counties, 
while  the  Emperor  sent  a  force  to  the  Thames,  it 
would  be  so  much  the  better.^  Other  noblemen  con- 
firmed the  statements  of  general  disaffection ;  and 
even  the  King's  Chamberlain,  Lord  Sandes,  pretend- 
ing sickness  as  an  excuse  for  retiring  from  Court, 
sent  a  secret  message  to  Chapuys  to  say  that  the 
King  had  lost  the  hearts  of  all  his  subjects,  and  that 
if  the  Emperor  only  knew  the  state  of  matters  in 
England  he  would  surely  not  delay  to  come  to  the 
relief  of  an  oppressed  nation.^ 

Now,  if  this  was  the  state  of  matters  even  before 
those  cruel  and  savage  executions  done  to  vindicate 
royal  supremacy,  what  was  it  likely  to  have  been 
after  they  had  taken  place  ?     Men  spoke,  of  course, 
with  bated  breath  as  far  as  they  dared  speak  of  it  at 
all.     England  was  tongue-tied,  and  we  need  look  for 
no   direct  expression   of  her   feelings ;    but    abroad, 
we  know  perfectly  well  what  was  thought  of  those 
brutalities.      The   news   of   the   execution   of  Prior 
Houghton  and  his  companions  seemed  very  outrage-  puWic 
ous  to  the  papal  nuncio  in  France,  who  was  informed  J^^S,  at 
besides  that  the  whole  of  London  was  displeased  at  it.^  home  and 
From  Venice,  too,  the  English  ambassador  reported  ^^'^°^^' 

1  L.  R,  VII.  1206.  ^  L.  P.,  VIII.  48.  ^  L.  P.,  vili.  726. 


6      LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION   bk.  m 

that  it  was  considered  extreme  cruelty  and  against 
all  honest  laws  of  God  and  men.  He  had  never  seen 
Italians  so  vehement  about  anything.^  At  Rome,  of 
course,  it  was  most  deeply  felt  of  all ;  and  it  aroused 
a  feeling  not  only  of  indignation  against  the  tyrant, 
but  also  of  such  admiration  for  his  victims  that  some 
of  the  cardinals  said  that  they  envied  such  a  death.  ^ 
Such  was  the  feeling  for  the  first  martyrs  of  the  new 
Act,  even  before  the  further  butcheries  of  More  and 
Fisher.  Yet  in  England  men  could  say  nothing. 
The  King's  power  was  irresistible ;  and  if  he  insisted 
on  vindicating  his  ecclesiastical  supremacy  by  such 
savage  methods,  what  was  to  be  done  ? 

It  was  a  perplexing  question.  A  whole  nation 
could  not  be  expected  to  imitate  the  example  of 
Reynolds,  and  Hale,  and  the  three  Carthusian  priors, 
and  Bishop  Fisher,  and  Sir  Thomas  More.  How 
many  could  calmly  face  the  prospect  of  strangulation, 
the  ripping  knife,  the  block,  to  yield  their  testimony 
to  the  belief  that  there  was  a  law  above  the  laws  of 
Parliament  and  the  will  of  a  despotic  king?  The 
great  majority  could  retain  that  belief,  yet  give  a 
qualified  oath  with  which  the  authorities  were  con- 
tent. Even  More's  noble-hearted  daughter,  Margaret 
Roper,  did  that,  and  would  have  persuaded  her  father 
to  do  it  too.  What  was  compulsory  surely  could  not 
be  wrong,  especially  with  the  reservation,  "  as  far  as 
lawful."  Even  Convocation  had  made  a  somewhat 
similar  reservation  when  it  acknowledged  the  royal 
supremacy,  though  the  reservation  was  afterwards 
treated  as  nil  by  Parliament,  which  cited  the  acknow- 
ledgment without  the  qualification  as  a  warrant 
for  "  the  Act  of  Supreme  Head."  Churchmen  might 
repent  too  late  the  concessions  that  they  had  made ; 
but  Convocation,  under  Warham's  guidance,  had  not 
really  sanctioned  in  full  the  supremacy  which  Henry 
claimed.      There  was  something,   no  doubt,   in   the 

1  L.P.,  VIII.  874.  "^  L.  P.,  VIII.  786,  807. 


CH  I.   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL       7 

way  they  recognised  it,  too  much  akin  to  that  religion 
of  casuistry  by  which  Henry  himself  would  fain  have 
justified  his  divorce  ;  and,  indeed,  it  was  the  reli- 
gion of  casuistry  which  now  was  on  its  trial.  But 
what  else  but  casuistry  was  at  the  bottom  of  this 
whole  divorce  question,  which  ended  in  acts  of  schism? 
The  supreme  authority  of  the  Eoman  pontifi"  was  an 
authority  to  determine  cases  of  conscience  before  an 
external  tribunal.  Sweep  away  the  casuistry  of  the 
canon  law  and  the  Pope's  authority  was  gone.  Put 
down  the  Pope's  authority  by  the  strong  hand,  and 
casuistry  might  still  fairly  plead  that  the  subjects  of 
a  realm  could  not  be  condemned  for  doing  the  best 
they  could  under  trying  circumstances.  Besides, 
royal  authority,  as  well  as  papal,  had  always  been 
regarded  as  sacred,  and  it  was  hard  to  leave  it  to 
the  individual  to  draw  the  line  between  them. 

So  when  the  King's  authority  came  in  conflict  Qixestions 
with  the  Pope's,  very  serious  and  perplexing  questions  science. 
were  raised,  even  in  regard  to  ethics.  Prior  Houghton 
himself  sought  the  best  advice,  and  Father  Fewterer, 
the  head  and  confessor  of  the  great  monastery  of 
Sion,  was  entirely  against  his  yielding  to  royal 
supremacy.  But  when  he  saw  the  result  of  the 
counsel  he  had  given  him.  Father  Fewterer  deeply 
reproached  himself.  "  I  beseech  you  to  forgive  me, 
most  gentle  brethren,"  he  said,  when  on  his  death- 
bed, to  eight  of  the  remaining  Charterhouse  monks, 
who,  indeed,  had  been  sent  to  him  on  purpose 
that  he  might  cure  their  obstinacy  :  "I  am  guilty  of 
the  death  of  your  reverend  Father,  of  which  I  was 
the  cause ;  for  I  encouraged  him  in  his  resolution  to 
die  in  the  cause  for  which  he  suffered,  and  for  which 
you  are  brought  hither.  Now,  however,  I  am  of 
another  mind,  and  I  perceive  that  the  cause  is  not 
one  for  which  we  are  bound  to  suffer  death."  ^ 

The  Carthusians  had  remained  singularly  steadfast 

1  Channcy's  Historia  aliquot  Martyrum  Anglorum  (ed.  Doreaii),  p.  114. 


8  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

even  after  the  awful  death  of  their  venerated  prior. 
The  daily  services  continued  as  of  old  in  that  quiet 
retreat  outside  the  city  and  Smithfield.    The  convent, 
indeed,  could  not  think  of  proceeding  to  elect  a  new 
Efforts  to    prior ;  ^    for  even  on  the  day  of  Prior  Houghton's 
remSnhf''   martyrdom  they  were  visited  by  Thomas  Bedyll,  clerk 
Charter-"    of  the  Couucil,  who  brought  with  him  a  bundle  of  books 
monks  to    and  "annotations,"  written  against  the  primacy  of  "the 
conformity.  Bishop  of  Romc  "  and  even  of  St.  Peter,  showing  that 
all  the  Apostles  were  equal  by  the  law  of  God.    He  con- 
versed for  an  hour  and  a  half  with  the  vicar  and  procur- 
ator of  the  House  (Fathers  Humphrey  Middlemore  and 
William  Exmew,  two  of  the  three  who  were  after- 
wards tried  with  Fisher  and  suffered  three  days  before 
him),  and  he  left  the  books  and  annotations  for  the 
edification  of  the  convent  to  bring  them  to  conformity; 
but  the  vicar  and  procurator  sent  back  the  books 
next  day  without  any  message   either  by  word  or 
writing.    Bedyll  was  then  confined  to  bed  by  a  fever, 
and,  sending  for  the  procurator  to  come  and  speak  to 
him,  asked  whether  he  and  the  vicar  and  others  had 
examined  the  books.     The  procurator  said  that  he 
and  the  vicar  and  Newdigate  (the  third  of  the  above- 
mentioned  trio)  "  had  spent  the  time  upon  them  until 

9  or  10  of  the  clock  at  night,  and  that  they  saw 
nothing  in  them  whereby  they  were  moved  to  alter 
their  opinion."  Bedyll  pointed  out  the  danger  of  this 
opinion,  "  which  was  like  to  be  the  destruction  of 
them  and  their  house  for  ever,"  but  they  showed 
themselves  quite  unmoved  and  ready  to  meet  the 
fate  that  they  were  soon  to  undergo.  Worse  still, 
when  he  asked  the  procurator  whether  the  rest  of 
the  brethren  were  of  like  opinion,  he  said  he  was  not 
sure,  but  believed  that  they  were  all  of  one  mind. 
Bedyll  then  told  him  he  believed  they  were  inspired 
by  "the  spirit  which  appeared  before  God  and  said 

'  L.P.,  VIII,  585  is  out  of  place.     It  was  in  1536  that  Father  Trafford  was 
forced  upon  the  convent  as  prior. 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL      9 

he  would  be  a  false  spirit  in  the  mouths  of  the 
prophets  of  Achab,"  and  he  wrote  to  Cromwell  with 
remarkable  unction : — 

Finally,  I  suppose  it  to  be  the  will  of  God  that  as  their 
religion  had  a  simple  beginning,  so  in  this  realm  it  shall 
have  a  strange  end,  procured  by  themselves  and  by  none 
others.  And  albeit  they  pretend  holiness  in  this  behalf, 
surely  the  ground  of  their  said  opinion  is  hypocrisy,  vain- 
glory, confederacy,  obstinacy,  to  the  intent  they  may  be  seen 
to  the  world,  or  specially  to  such  as  have  confidence  in  them, 
more  faithful  and  more  constant  than  any  other."  ^ 

These  disgraceful  words  are  at  least  a  tribute  to 
the  high  repute  in  which  the  Carthusians  were  held  for 
constancy  to  their  profession.     The  King  undoubtedly 
felt  that  if  he  could  only  succeed  in  getting  such  men 
on  his  side  he  need  hardly  fear  serious  opposition 
from  any  other  quarter.     And  a  curious  report  got 
abroad  shortly  after  this  that  the  King  himself  had  The  King 
gone  in  disguise  to  the  Charterhouse  to  persuade  the  ^ave*° 
monks  to  compliance — a   statement  which,   strange  visitedthe 
though  it  be,  seems  really  to  be  tolerably  well  authen-  house ^^ 
ticated.     For  not  only  was  it  believed  by  Francis  L,  himself. 
who  told  it  as  a  fact  to  the  papal  nuncio  at  his  Court, 
but  the  same  nuncio  read  a  statement  to  the  like  effect 
in  a  letter  shown  him  by  the  Imperial  ambassador  at 
the  time.^     It  seems  also  to  be  corroborated  by  some 
later  traditions  to  be  mentioned  presently,  notwith- 
standing an  important  discrepancy.      For  it  would 
appear  that  there  was  at  least  one  of  those  Carthusian 
monks  on  whom  the  King  might  hope  to  bring  his  own 
personal  influence  to  bear.     Sebastian  Newdigate  had 
been,  in  past  years,  a  gentleman  of  his  privy  chamber, 
"  and  not  a  little  favored  by  him  " — in  so  much  that 
his  sister.  Lady  Dormer,  greatly  feared  that  he  would 
be  corrupted  by  a  dissolute  Court.      But  when  he 
himself  perceived  its  moral   dangers,   to  which   the 

^  Wright's  Suppression  of  the  Monasteries,  pp.  40,  41. 
"^  L.P.,  VIII.  837. 


lo    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

King's  determination  to  seek  a  divorce  fully  opened 
his  eyes,  he  resolved  to  take  refuge  in  a  monastic  life 
under  the  habit  of  a  Carthusian.^  Coming  to  the 
Charterhouse,  therefore,  with  the  memory,  doubtless, 
of  pleasant  hours  of  social  intercourse  in  the  past, 
the  King  seems  to  have  made  one  effort  to  rescue 
at  least  Newdigate  from  the  awful  fate  by  which  he 
was  determined  to  vindicate  his  law  of  supremacy. 
But  not  only  had  the  sunshine  of  royal  favour  lost 
its  power  over  Newdigate's  mind,  but  the  terrors  of 
Prior  Houghton's  fate  were  counterbalanced  to  him 
by  the  prospect  of  that  "  crown  of  life  "  which  faith- 
fulness unto  death  would  secure  for  him. 

The  Carthusian  Chauncy,  who  lived  through  those 
terrible  days  and  reproached  himself  afterwards  for 
not  having  had  the  courage  to  be  a  martyr  like  some 
of  his  brethren,  says  that  three  weeks  after  the 
slaughter  of  Prior  Houghton  and  his  fellows,  some 
ignoble  men  got  authority  from  the  King's  Vicar- 
General  Cromwell  still  further  to  afflict  the  monks, 
Seizure  of  and  scizcd  the  persons  of  Middlemore,  Exmew,  and 
thr^eemore  Ncwdigatc,  whom  they  threw  into  a  prison  reeking 
thusians.  with  filth,  whcrc  they  were  bound  with  iron  chains 
about  their  necks  and  legs  to  posts  and  pillars.^ 
Chauncy's  narrative,  though  written  from  memory 
many  years  after,  is  for  the  most  part  minutely 
accurate,  and  bears  the  test  of  comparison  with  con- 
temporary documents  to  a  degree  almost  beyond 
expectation.  But  one  little  point  is  here  omitted, 
and  its  omission  really  attests  his  accuracy  still 
further.  Three  weeks  from  the  date  of  Prior 
Houghton's  martyrdom  bring  us  to  the  25th  day  of 
May ;  and  from  the  indictment  of  Middlemore,  Exmew, 
and  Newdigate  it  is  clear  that  they  were  taken  from 
the  Charterhouse  to  Stepney,  v/here  Cromwell  had  a 

1  See  the  Life  of  Jane  Dormer  (edited  by  J.  Stevenson),  pp.  19-23. 

^  ChAuncj's  Historia  aliquot  MartyrumAnglorum,  p.  107.  The  statement 
is  confirmed  by  a  fragment  among  the  collections  of  Camden  and  Stow. 
See  L.  P.,  VIII.  895.     See  also  what  the  Bishop  of  Faenza  says,  No.  846. 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     1 1 

mansion,  on  the  25th  day  of  May,  and  there  each  of 
them,  in  reply,  of  course,  to  a  question  put  to  them  all, 
declared  severally,  "  I  cannot,  nor  will,  consent  to  be 
obedient  to  the  King's  Highness  as  a  true,  lawful,  and 
obedient  subject,  to  take  and  repute  him  to  be  Supreme 
Head  in  Earth  of  the  Cliurch  of  England  under  Christ." 
These  are  the  words  charged  against  them  when  they 
were  brought  to  trial  on  the  11th  June;^  and  it 
must  have  been  immediately  after  this  repudiation 
of  royal  supremacy  that  they  were  thrown  into  the 
Marshalsea  prison — for  that  was  their  place  of  con- 
finement.^ 

There,  in  their  horrible  dungeon,  chained  in  an 
upright  position,  which  allowed  no  rest  for  the  body, 
they  spent  dismal  days  and  nights  for  a  whole  fort- 
night ;  and  it  was  there,  according  to  later  tradition, 
that  the  Kinoj  went  to  visit  them  in  disguise.  So  it 
is  stated  in  the  Life  of  Jane  Dormer,  and  also  in 
the  MS.  of  Father  Transam  belonging  to  the  English 
Carthusians  now  at  Parkminster,^  both  of  which, 
though  written  in  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  appear  to  be  generally  trustworthy.  It  is 
not  likely,  however,  that  the  nuncio  in  France, 
writing  at  the  time,  was  misinformed  about  the 
place ;  for  though  it  is  probable  enough  that  the  news 
of  an  incident  which  took  place  after  the  25th  May 
in  London  would  have  reached  Abbeville,  where  the 
nuncio  was  with  the  French  Court,  before  the  6th 
June,  and  that  the  place  might  have  been  misreported, 
yet  it  is  much  more  credible  that  the  King  should  have 
visited  the  Charterhouse  than  have  entered  a  noisome 
prison  to  reason  with  a  man  who  was  actually  suffer- 
ing from  the  horrors  of  such  a  constrained  position. 

After  a  fortnight  of  this  misery  it  must  have  been 
a  real  relief  to  the  three  monks  to  be  transferred,  as 

1  L.  p.,  VIII.  886. 

^  Life  of  Jane  Dormer,  p.  27,  where,  besides  the  place  of  confinement  being 
named,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  date  is  given  quite  accurately,  25th  May. 
»  See  Hendriks,  pp.  99,  170,  310. 


12    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

they  were  apparently,  on  the  8  th  June,  to  the  Tower, 
even  though  they  were  to  be  brought  thence  three 
days  later  in  the  custody  of  Sir  Edmund  Walsingham 
to  their  trial  at  Westminster.  That  took  place  on  the 
11th,  and  as  juries  by  this  time  knew  that  they  could 
only  refuse  to  convict  at  their  own  peril,  sentence  was 
Their  mar-  passcd  the  samc  day.  They  were  executed  at  Tyburn 
tyrdom.  ^^^^  ^-^^  usual  barbarities  on  the  19th.  Bishop  Fisher 
had  been  condemned  just  two  days  before,  and  was  to 
suffer  on  the  22nd. 

It  would  have  been  strange  if  these  severities  had 
produced  no  effect,  especially  as  there  were  one  or  two 
weak  brethren  in  the  community  to  whom  the  rigour 
of  the  discipline  had  been  almost  too  great  a  trial 
in  times  less  exceptional.  Their  grievances  presently 
were  to  find  freer  utterance.  But  the  spirit  of  the 
brotherhood  as  a  whole  was  singularly  maintained. 
One  John  Whalley  was  put  for  a  time  in  possession  of 
their  house,  a  man  not  long  afterwards  made  pay- 
master of  the  King's  works  at  Dover,  and  a  little  later 
Master  of  the  Mint.  A  preacher  named  Rastell  had 
been  sent  to  persuade  the  monks,  but  they  had  laughed 
at  him.  Whalley  thought  he  knew  better  how  to  con- 
vert them.  First,  he  tells  Cromwell,  get  some  honest, 
loyal,  and  learned  men  to  stay  with  them ;  then  get 
Roland  Philips,  the  famous  preacher,  vicar  of  Croydon, 
Dr.  Buckmaster,  and  others  "  of  the  popish  sort,"  to 
preach  to  them  in  open  audience  against  their  super- 
stitions, but  not  to  be  suffered  to  speak  to  any  of 
them  alone.  After  which  Archbishop  Lee  of  York, 
Bishop  Gardiner  of  Winchester,  Bishop  Tunstall  of 
Durham,  and  other  bishops  of  similar  proclivities, 
should  likewise  preach  to  them.  The  undoubted 
attachment  of  such  men  to  the  old  order  of  the 
Church  would  add  force  to  their  advocacy  of  royal 
supremacy,  to  which  they  themselves  had  consented.^ 

^  Willingly  or  unwillingly,  the  whole  bench  of  bishops  had  taken  the  oath 
of  supremacy  between  the  10th  February  and  the  1st  June  (Z.  P.,  viii.  190, 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    13 

This  advice  seems  to  have  been  acted  on  to  some 
extent,  but  the  vicar  of  Croydon's  sermon  does  not 
appear  to  have  given  complete  satisfaction,  for  it 
"touched  in  parable"  the  King  and  Cromwell  and 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.^  But  the  Archbishop 
of  York  (Lee)  made  himself  serviceable  otherwise  than 
by  preaching  to  the  London  brethren  (if,  indeed,  he  ever 
did  so).  For  in  July  he  was  in  the  North  and  called 
before  him  the  Prior  of  Mountgrace,  one  of  the  houses 
of  the  Order  in  Yorkshire,  whom  he  found  "  very  con- 
formable," and  much  comforted  to  hear  that  by  that 
time  the  London  Charterhouse  and  other  houses  of 
his  religion  were  "stayed."  The  Archbishop  was 
also  of  opinion  that  Dr.  Horde,  Prior  of  Hinton,  a  man 
considerably  esteemed  throughout  the  Order,  who 
had  apparently  acknowledged  the  royal  supremacy, 
should  be  sent  to  all  the  different  houses  to  persuade 
them.  But  this  advice  seems  not  to  have  been  taken, 
for  Prior  Horde  had  certainly  shown  "  untowardness 
in  certain  things,"  and  was  not  quite  the  man  to  do 
the  work. ^  J] 

On  the  29th  May  Whalley  had  received  orders 
from  Cromwell  to  take  from  the  monks  such  books  as 
the  statutes  of  Bruno  "  and  such  like  doctors."  ^  They 
were  to  be  deprived  of  all  means  of  reference  even  to 
the  statutes  on  which  their  rule  was  founded.  Whalley 
was  assisted  in  the  work  by  Jasper  Filoll,  a  servant  of 
Cromwell's,  who  also  took  up  his  abode  in  the  house, 
and  continued  there  after  he  was  gone.  In  September 
Filoll  reported  on  the  expenses  of  the  establishment. 
He  found  that  the  demands  of  the  lay  brethren  were 
more  than  the  revenue  of  the  house  could  stand.  AVheat 
had  risen  4s.   3d.  a  quarter,  and  malt  20d. ;  and  yet 

311,  494,  803).  The  only  exceptions  were  Llandaff  (a  foreigner),  no  doubt 
deprived  by  this  time,  like  Ghinucci  of  Worcester  and  Campeggio  of  Salisbury, 
and  the  newly  appointed  successors  to  these  two  last,  Latimer  and  Shaxton. 

1  L.  P.,  VIII.  600,  602. 

^  L.  P.,  VIII.  1011.     Comp.  Nos.  402,  778.      For  particulars  about  Prior 
Horde  see  The  Somerset  Carthusians,  by  Miss  E.  M.  Thompson. 

2  L.  P.,  VIII.  778. 


14    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

they  expected,  he  said,  to  have  the  same  fare  as  in 
times  past,  with  the  old  bounteous  distribution  of 
bread,  ale,  and  fish  to  strangers  in  the  buttery,  "  and 
to  their  servants  and  vagabonds  at  the  gate."  This 
was  out  of  the  question.^ 

There  had  been  a  very  rainy  summer — a  calamity, 
as  people  thought,  due  to  the  King's  misdeeds — 
followed  by  a  very  bad  harvest,  and  on  the  2nd  October 
Filoll  followed  up  his  suggestions  by  the  following 
"  instructions,"  which  he  forwarded  to  Cromwell : — 

If  it  be  the  King's  pleasure  and  yours  that  this  Charter- 
house shall  stand  without  a  prior  as  it  now  doth,  it  seemeth 
then,  saving  your  mastership's  correction,  to  be  very  necessary 
to  minish  the  number  of  the  cloister  monks,  and  also  of  the 
lay  brothers,  at  the  least  by  so  many  as  hath  not,  ne  will  not, 
confess  the  King  to  be  their  Supreme  Head  under  God  here 
in  earth,  and  that  will  not  renounce  all  jurisdiction  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  and  of  all  his  laws  that  be  contrary  to  the 
good  laws  of  the  realm. 

That  done,  it  seemeth  to  be  necessary  that  they  shall  sit 
daily  in  their  fraytowr,  and  four  of  them  at  a  mess  of  meat, 
and  that  so  done  that  meat  that  now  serveth  twelve  persons 
will  serve  then  twenty  persons  honestly. 

It  seemeth  also  to  be  convenient  that  their  lay  steward, 
and  other  their  lay  servants  and  strangers,  should  eat  flesh 
in  their  hall  and  parlour,  contrary  to  their  old  ill  custom. 

Also,  if  any  of  the  cloister  monks  list  to  eat  flesh  it  were 
pity  to  constrain  him  to  eat  fish ;  for  such  constrained  abstin- 
ence shall  never  be  meritorious. 

It  is  no  great  marvel  though  many  of  these  monks  have 
heretofore  offended  God  and  the  King  by  their  foul  errors ; 
for  I  have  found  in  the  prior  and  proctor's  cells,  three  or  four 
sundry  printed  books  from  beyond  the  sea,  of  as  foul  errors 
and  heresies  as  may  be;  and  one  or  two  books  be  never 
printed  alone,  but  hundreds  of  them.  Wherefore,  by  your 
mastership's  favor,  it  seemeth  to  be  much  necessary  that 
their  cells  be  better  searched ;  for  I  can  perceive  few  of  them 
but  they  have  great  pleasure  in  reading  of  such  erroneous 
doctors,  and  little  or  none  in  reading  of  the  New  Testament 
or  in  other  good  books. 

1  L.  T.,  IX.  283. 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     15 

Also  Master  Bedyll  and  Mr.  Doctor  Crome  in  this 
vacation  time  called  Rochester  and  Fox  before  them,  and 
gave  them  marvellous  good  exhortations  by  the  space  of  an 
hour  and  more,  but  it  prevailed  nothing,  but  they  left  those 
two  fro  ward  monks  as  erroneous  as  they  found  them  ;  wherein 
was  much  lack  of  grace. 

Also,  William  Marshall  gave  lately  to  be  distributed 
among  all  our  monks  twenty-four  English  books  named  The 
Defence  of  Peace.  Many  of  them  received  those  books  and 
said  if  their  president  would  command  them  or  license  them 
to  read  it,  then  they  would  so  do,  or  else  not.  The  third  day 
following  all  they  save  one  sent  home  their  books  again  to 
me,  saying  that  their  President  had  commanded  them  so  to 
do.  Yet  at  more  leisure  Dampne  ^  John  Rochester  was  so 
fair  entreated  to  read  one  of  them  that  he  took  the  book 
and  kept  it  four  or  five  days,  and  then  burned  him ;  which  is 
good  matter  to  lay  to  them  at  the  time  when  your  pleasure 
shall  be  to  visit  them. 

Where  in  every  office  of  the  house  there  is  set  one  or  two 
lay  brothers,  it  is  thought  that  they  be  not  profitable  to  the 
hoiise  but  much  prodigal,  every  one  of  them  to  the  other  and 
to  their  friends  elsewhere. 

Also  the  lay  servants  of  that  house  be  but  like  Abbey 
men,  and  will  do  but  as  they  list ;  and  they  be  the  common 
messengers  for  bearing  and  bringing  of  letters,  tidings,  and 
credence  to  and  fro  the  convent  in  the  cloister ;  and  every  of 
the  said  lay  servants  hath  a  key  to  the  cloister  door,  to  come 
and  to  go,  and  let  in  and  let  out  their  friends  at  their 
pleasure. 

One  man  there  hath  the  convent  seal  of  twenty  houses  in 
London,  and  his  writing  is  much  suspicious,  for  it  is  razed  in 
twenty  words ;  and  the  tenths  decayeth  and  he  is  bound  to 
reparations,  and  is  not  able  to  repair  them,  for  he  hath  long 
owed  £18  to  this  house  and  yet  oweth  it ;  and  also  he  hath 
forfeited  £40  to  this  house  for  not  keeping  his  covenants. 

There  be  also  other  tenants,  and  one  of  them  hath  two  or 
three  houses  without  any  lease  of  them,  and  they  maketh 
their  under-tenants  at  their  will,  and  driveth  those  tenements 
to  ruin ;  and  they  will  take  no  warning  to  avoid.  And  some 
of  those  tenements  will  be  let  with  reparations  borne  by  the 
tenant,  and  good  surety  therefor. 

Your  Mastership's  pleasure  and  commandment  known,  all 
these  matters  may  be  reformed  well  enough  and  in  short  space. 

1  "Dampne "  or  "  Dan,"  equivalent  to  the  Latin  dominus. 


1 6    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  in 

Memorandum,  for  Fogwell  pound,  it  is  like  to  be  destroyed 
by  the  means  of  an  ill  tenant  that  hath  no  lease  therein,  for 
he  is  a  very  poor  and  wilful  young  man,  that  doth  steal  and 
destroy  carps  there,  to  the  treble  value  of  his  rent ;  and  yet 
that  pound  is  no  part  of  his  covenant,  but  he  hath  free  entry 
thereto  and  shutteth  out  all  other  the  owners. 

Master  Maydwell,  otherwise  called  the  Scottish  Friar, 
hath  at  mine  instance  lain  three  nights  in  the  Charterhouse  to 
examine  certain  books  which  I  think  to  be  much  erroneous. 
I  beseech  your  Mastership  that  I  may  know  your  pleasure 
whether  he  shall  tarry  here  any  longer  or  nay.  The  man  is 
very  honest,  but  he  hath  no  money  to  pay.^ 

This  Scottish  Friar,  Master  John  Maydwell,  had 
been  employed  to  preach  to  the  brethren,  and  they 
were  at  first  content  to  give  him  a  hearing,  but  next 
day  sent  him  word  that  they  would  not  hear  him 
again  as  he  preached  against  the  worship  of  images 
and  was  a  blasphemer  of  Saints.^  Presently  an 
Anew  "Order  for  the  Charterhouse"^  was  drawn  up, 
fOTtir  putting  the  house  under  five  or  six  temporal 
Charter-  govcmors,  two  or  thrcc  of  whom  were  to  be  present 
°^^^'  at  every  meal  and  lodge  there  at  night.  They  were 
to  call  before  them  all  the  members  and  servants  of 
the  house,  and  tell  them  that  the  King  had  pardoned 
all  their  heresies  and  treasons  committed  before  that 
day,  but  that  they  should  die  without  mercy  if  they 
offended  again.  They  were  to  take  the  keys  from  the 
procurator  and  other  officers,  and  govern  the  house, 
receiving  all  the  rents  and  making  all  the  payments. 
They  were  to  call  the  monks  individually  before  them 
at  different  times,  use  all  persuasions  and  offer  dis- 
pensations to  those  willing  to  leave  the  Order,  with 
stipends  for  a  year  or  two  till  they  had  found  livings, 
and  so  forth.  It  seems  to  have  been  after  this  that, 
as  we  learn  from  Chauncy,  two  seculars  appointed 
by  Cromwell  to  have  charge  of  the  place,  living  very 
comfortably  themselves,   reduced   the   by  no  means 

1  MS.  Cott.,  Cleopatra  E  iv.  ff.  36,  37. 
^  L.  P.,  IX.  283.  ^  L.  P.,  IX.  524. 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     17 

luxurious  diet  of  the  monks,  leaving  them  to  starve 
on  slender  allowances  of  cheese  or  some  such  food, 
and  called  in  bullies  who  jeered  at  and  buffeted  them/ 
Everything,  in  short,  was  done  to  depress,  intimi- 
date, and  demoralise  the  community.  Dan  Thomas 
Salter,  who  had  of  old  been  given  to  complaining  of 
his  brethren,^  had  been  imprisoned  by  Prior  Houghton 
for  some  breach  of  discipline,  and  was  willing  enough 
to  invoke  Cromwell's  aid  for  his  release.^  Whalley 
recommended  Cromwell  to  set  him  at  liberty,*  which 
no  doubt  he  did ;  and  afterwards  he  and  Dan  John 
Darley  informed  Jasper  Filoll  that  they  would  fain 
be  out  of  the  cloister  with  Cromwell's  favour.  At 
the  same  time  Dan  Nicholas  Eawlyns,  with  some  help 
from  Archbishop  Cranmer,  procured  from  the  new 
authority  a  capacity  to  leave  his  Order,  but  had  to 
borrow  secular  garments  from  other  priests  to  go 
abroad  in  the  world  with.^  Applying  to  Cromwell 
for  this  dispensation,  he  poured  forth  sentiments 
which  he  durst  not  utter  inside  the  convent.  He 
had  heard,  he  wrote,  that  the  King,  Lords,  and 
Commons,  who  had  a  conscience  and  a  soul  to  keep 
as  well  as  himself,  had  enacted  that  the  King  should 
be  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England,  for  not 
consenting  to  which  their  Father  Prior  and  others 
had  suffered  death.  But  he  desired  to  express  his 
loyalty,  though  his  brethren  who  suspected  him  for 
it  would  wonder  at  him  like  a  company  of  crows  or 
daws  at  a  tame  hawk.  He  complained,  moreover, 
that,  contrary  to  the  statutes,  he  had  not  even  had  a 
half-year's  probation  before  entering  the  Order,  and 
that  his  health  could  not  stand  the  fasting  and  watch- 
ing. There  were  not  six  monks  in  the  cloister,  he 
said,  but  had  some  infirmity  or  other.  ^ 

1  Hist,  aliquot  Martyrum,  109.  This  could  not  have  been  till  after  the 

13th   October,  at  which  date  they  seem  to  have  fared   tolerably  well.     See 

L.  P.,  IX.  597.  2  Chauncy's//w<.,  pp.  81,  82. 

»  L.  P.,  VII.  246.  4  L.  P.,  VIII.  601. 

6  L.  P.,  IX.  283,  284.  6  L.  P.,  ix.  1150. 

VOL.  II  C 


Barley's 
vision 


1 8    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

A  curious  story  is  told  of  Dan  John  Darley  in 
earlier  days,  which  seems  slightly  overdrawn.  He 
one  day  murmured  at  his  scanty  fare,  especially  at  the 
fish  diet,  declaring  that  he  would  rather  eat  toads. 
He  straightway  had  an  opportunity,  not  at  all  to  his 
satisfaction,  for  his  cell  was  invaded  with  such  a 
number  of  toads  that  they  jumped  after  him  when- 
ever he  turned  in  it,  leaped  upon  his  plate  when  he 
dined,  and  were  his  companions  in  bed.  If  he  threw 
one  into  the  fire  it  jumped  out  unhurt,  and  when  he 
took  one  up  with  the  tongs  for  that  purpose  it  emitted 
such  a  smell  that  he  was  forced  to  desist.  Even  other 
monks  in  the  cloister  smelt  that  horrid  odour ;  and 
the  toads  continued  in  his  garden  for  the  space  of 
three  months,  as  he  himself  used  to  relate  with  great 
grief  of  heart.  ^ 
John  Dan  John  Darley,  no  doubt,  had  a  fevered  imagi- 

nation ;  but  what  he  imagined  during  that  troubled 
year,  1535,  was  a  thing  that  got  noised  outside  the 
monastery  and  gave  sensible  discomfort  to  Cromwell, 
who,  as  the  King's  minister,  did  his  utmost  to  pre- 
vent the  spread  of  the  story.  Nevertheless  it  got 
abroad,  even  as  far  as  Rome,  that  the  Charterhouse 
of  London  had  been  the  scene  of  revelations  from 
a  deceased  person,  showing  the  glorious  crown  of 
martyrdom  that  had  been  won  by  the  Cardinal  of 
Rochester  and  the  saints  who  had  preceded  him.^ 
Dan  John  Darley  had,  in  the  spring  before  Prior 
Houghton's  execution,  attended  the  deathbed  of 
another  of  the  house  named  Father  Raby,  and  had 
said  to  him,  "  Good  Father  Raby,  if  the  dead  may 
come  to  the  quick,  I  beseech  you  to  come  to  me  "  ; 
and  Raby,  just  before  he  died,  said  "  Yea."  The 
rest  must  be  told  in  the  words  of  Dan  John  Darley 
himself : — 

"  And  since  that  I  never  did  think  upon  him  to 
St.  John's  Day,  Baptist,  last  past.     Item,  the  same 

^  Chauncy,  pp.  83,  84.  2  x.  R,  ix.  681. 


cH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     19 

day  at  5  of  the  clock  at  afternoon,  I  being  in  contem- 
plation in  our  entry  in  our  cell,  suddenly  he  appeared 
to  me  in  a  monk's  habit,  and  said  to  me,  '  Why  do  ye 
not  follow  our  Father  ? '  And  I  said,  '  Wherefore  ? ' 
He  said,  'For  he  is  a  martyr  in  heaven  next  unto 
angels.'  And  I  said,  '  Where  be  all  our  other 
Fathers  which  died  as  well  as  he  ? '  He  answered 
and  said,  '  They  be  well,  but  not  so  well  as  he.'  And 
then  I  said  to  him,  '  Father,  how  do  ye  ? '  And 
he  answered  and  said,  '  Well  enough,  but  prayer  both 
for  you  and  other  doth  good.'  And  so  suddenly 
vanished  away. 

"  Item,  upon  Saturday  next  after,  at  5  of  the  clock 
in  the  morning,  in  the  same  place  in  our  entry,  he 
appeared  to  me  again  with  a  long  white  beard  and  a 
white  staff  in  his  hand,  lifting  it  up,  whereupon  I  was 
afraid ;  and  then,  leaning  upon  his  staflf,  said  to  me, 
*  I  am  sorry  that  I  lived  not  to  I  had  been  a  martyr.' 
And  I  said,  *  I  think  ye  be  as  well  as  ye  were  a 
martyr.'  And  he  said,  '  Nay ;  for  my  lord  of 
Rochester  and  our  Father  was  next  unto  the  angels 
in  heaven.'  And  then  I  said,  'Father,  what  else?' 
And  then  he  answered  and  said  :  '  The  angels  of  peace 
did  lament  and  mourn  without  measure ' ;  and  so 
vanished  away."  ^ 

It  was  not  pleasant,  certainly,  for  the  King  and 
his  chief  minister  when  even  a  weak  brother  of  the 
Charterhouse  could  utter  stories  like  this.  But  his 
dream  does  not  seem  to  have  stirred  him  to  emulate 
the  martyrs,  and  no  doubt  the  attentions  he  received 
from  Whalley  and  Filoll  increased  his  desire  to  be 
relieved  from  the  obligation  of  his  monastic  vows. 
He  was  secure,  moreover,  of  filling  another  post  at 
Salisbury ;  ^  and  it  may  be  presumed  that  with 
Cromwell's  good  leave  he  quitted  London  and  went 
thither. 

^  Wright's  Suppression  oftlie  Monasteries,  pp.  34,  35. 
2  i.  P.,  IX.  284. 


20    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Another  weak  brother  was  won  over  to  the  King's 
service  in  a  more  effectual  fashion ;  and  as  he  was 
really  a  man  of  great  ability  I  must  give  some  little 
account  of  him.  In  1534,  when  the  oaths  of  the 
Charterhouse  monks  were  taken  by  Bishop  Roland 
Lee,  one  of  those  nineteen  brethren  who  were  priests 
Andrew  was  Audrcw  Bordc.  His  physical  constitution  was 
Borde.  j^^^  ^^^^  ^g  j-^  endurc  easily  the  severities  of  the 
Carthusian  rule.  He  wrote  himself  to  the  Prior  of 
Hinton,  "  I  am  not  able  to  bide  the  rugorosyte 
of  your  religion."  The  close  air  and  confinement 
especially  disagreed  with  him,  and  perhaps  it  was 
partly  for  this  reason  that  about  the  year  1520  he 
procured  from  Rome  a  dispensation  to  leave  the 
Order,  though  the  reason  assigned  for  it  was  that  he 
might  be  made  suffragan  to  the  aged  Bishop  Sher- 
burn  of  Chichester.  This  office  he  never  exercised, 
and  he  remained  a  Carthusian,  but  seems  to  have 
had  licence  to  go  abroad,  and  he  studied  medicine  in 
various  schools  on  the  Continent.  After  his  return 
to  England  he  served  for  some  time  as  physician  in 
attendance  on  Sir  Robert  Drury,  when,  in  1530 — the 
year  in  which  Wolsey  was  sent  northward  to  his  See 
of  York — the  Duke  of  Norfolk  sent  to  have  his 
advice,  it  would  seem  rather  urgently,  in  the  absence 
of  Dr.  Buttes,  the  Court  physician.  Borde,  feeling 
himself  "  but  a  young  doctor  "  then,  though  he  could 
not  have  been  very  young  in  years,  undertook  the 
case  with  some  anxiety ;  but  his  patient  recovered, 
and  Borde  was  called  to  the  King's  presence.  It  was 
probably  owing  to  royal  intercession  that  Prior 
Batmanson  then  procured  for  him  from  the  Grande 
Chartreuse  a  dispensation  from  his  "  religion  "  ;  and 
this,  no  doubt,  enabled  him  to  go  a  second  time 
beyond  sea  and  visit  the  most  approved  universities 
and  schools  "to  have  a  true  cognition  of  the  practice 
of  physic."  He  took  counsel  with  the  most  eminent 
physicians  of  the  day  with  the  view  of  writing  "  a 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    21 

dietary  of  health "  for  the  Duke  his  patron's  use. 
But  he  was  home  again,  and  in  his  cloister,  as  we 
have  seen,  on  the  6th  June  1534,  when  Bishop 
Roland  Lee  visited  the  house  in  company  with  Sheriff 
Kytson,  and  he  took  the  oath  of  supremacy  along 
with  his  fellow  monks.  He  was  certainly  not  one  of 
the  most  unwilling. 

In  fact,  it  is  clear  that  by  this  time  his  loyalty  to 
the  Order  was  suspected  among  the  brethren.  He 
was  kept  in  prison  strictly  and  was  compelled,  as  he 
afterwards  explained  to  Cromwell,  to  write  at  their 
request  to  Prior  Houghton  in  the  Tower  ;  for  which 
he  hoped  Cromwell  would  pardon  him.  "  For  I  could 
never  know  nothing  of  no  manner  of  matter  but  only 
by  them " — such  was  his  excuse,  and  he  was  thus 
led  "  stultitiously  "  to  do  as  many  of  the  others  did, 
knowing  "  neither  the  King's  noble  acts  "  nor  Crom- 
well's authority  as  the  King's  Vicegerent.  But 
Cromwell  not  only  set  him  free  but  gave  him,  as  he 
said,  "  clearness  of  conscience,"  and  he  fully  re- 
cognised "  the  ignorance  and  blindness "  which  he 
had  shared  with  his  fellow  monks.  In  short,  royal 
supremacy  suited  him  very  well  as  a  means  of 
emancipation  from  monastic  discipline,  though  he 
still  remained  a  Carthusian  monk  with  licence  to 
travel  abroad.  For  he  presently  crossed  the  sea 
again;  and  by  June  1535,  seven  weeks  after  his 
prior  had  suffered  at  Tyburn,  and  while  Bishop  Fisher 
was  in  the  Tower  after  sentence  awaiting  execution 
on  Tower  Hill,  he  wrote  from  Bordeaux  to  Cromwell, 
saying  that  he  had  "  perlustrated  "  Normandy,  France, 
Gascony  and  Bayonne,^  Castile,  Biscay,  Spain,  and 
part  of  Portugal,  and  had  returned  through  Aragon 
and  Navarre  to  Bordeaux.  And  as  one  result  of  his 
travels  he  was  compelled  to  inform  Cromwell  that  he 
had  heard  by  "  divers  credible  persons  "  of  all  those 

^  "Byon"    in    MS.,    which   has   been   misread    "Lyon"   and  given   as 
'Lyons"  in  L.  P.,  viii.  901. 


22  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

countries,  and  also  of  Rome,  Italy,  and  Germany,  that 
the  Pope,  the  Emperor,  and  other  Christian  princes, 
all  but  the  French  King,  were  dead  set  against  the 
King  his  master ;  that  fleets  and  armies  were  every- 
where preparing,  and  that  England  had  few  friends 
in  those  parts  of  Europe. 

From  Bordeaux  Andrew  Borde  traversed  the  south 
of  France  into  Dauphiny,  where  he  visited  the  chief 
He  visits  house  of  his  Order,  the  Grande  Chartreuse,  having  a 
chartreusl^  little  busincss  to  do  there  both  for  himself  and  for 
'  the  King  of  England.  The  solitude  of  the  great 
monastery  was  no  doubt  favourable  to  his  designs. 
The  monks  could  have  known  nothing  of  Henry's 
cruelties  to  their  brethren,  or  of  Paul  HI.'s  deter- 
mination, already  formed,  to  deprive  him  of  his 
kingdom  if  he  could  but  obtain  the  aid  of  temporal 
princes  to  carry  out  the  sentence.  They  had  just 
elected  a  new  Grand  Prior,  by  name  John  Gailhard, 
whom  Andrew  approached  as  an  English  Carthusian, 
declaring  that  though  he  had  a  licence  to  leave 
his  house  procured  for  him  by  Father  Batmanson, 
his  conscience  was  not  satisfied  without  visiting  the 
General  of  the  Order,  and  being  assured  that  he  was 
fully  "  dispensed  with  the  religion."  He  then  told 
him  something  about  the  affairs  of  the  Order  in 
England,  but  evidently  without  saying  a  word  about 
the  fate  of  Prior  Houghton,  which,  indeed,  it  is  just 
possible  that  he  might  not  have  heard  of  himself,^ 
indicating  that  there  were  disputes  between  the  King 

^  This  seems  difficult  to  believe  considering  the  indignation  which  it 
aroused  on  the  Continent,  even  at  Venice,  as  we  have  seen  above.  But 
Borde  had  doubtless  left  England  the  year  before,  and  the  news  might  not 
have  reached  the  south  of  France,  where  perhaps  efforts  were  made  to  stop 
its  diffusion.  It  is  cuiious  that  writing  (no  doubt)  from  the  Grande 
Chartreuse,  on  the  2nd  August  1535,  when  there  was  no  prior  at  the  head  of 
the  London  Charterhouse,  he  addresses  his  letter  "to  Master  Prior  and  the 
Convent  of  the  Charterhouse  of  London,  and  to  all  priors  and  convents  of 
the  said  Order  in  England."  And  even  after  he  had  reached  London,  in 
August  or  September,  he  wrote  to  Cromwell  referring  to  a  licence  he  had  "to 
depart  from  the  religion"  granted  to  him  by  "the  Prior  of  the  Charterhouse 
of  London  last  being."  Did  he  really  mean  Houghton,  or  was  he  thinking 
of  his  predecessor  Batmanson  ? 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    23 

and  the  monks,  which  a  letter  from  the  head  of  the 
Order  would  tend  to  pacify.     The  Grand  Prior  gave  and  obtains 
him  all  he  wanted,  and  enabled  him  to  write  to  his  f^n^tiie 
brother  Carthusians  at  home  that  the  Father  of  the  «rami 
Head  Charterhouse  exhorted  them  "  in  any  wise  "  to    '^^°^' 
obey  their  King,  being  sorry  to  hear  that  there  had 
been  "  wilful  and  sturdy  opinions  among  them  to  the 
contrary."      The  Grand   Prior  was  also  induced  to 
make  Thomas  Cromwell  and  the  Bishop  of  Coventry 
and  Lichfield  brothers  of  the  religion,  apparently  on 
the  supposition  that  they  would  be  mediators  with 
the  King  in  behalf  of  the  Order ;    and  a  mutilated 
letter  to  the  Bishop  still  exists  which  he  entrusted 
to  Borde  to  take  home  with  him.     It  is  dated  at  the 
Chartreuse,  1st  August  1535. 

Having  achieved  this  grand  object  Borde  lost  no 
time  in  coming  home,  and  was  with  Cromwell  at 
Bishop's  Waltham  in  September.  In  the  following 
spring  we  find  him  in  Scotland,  studying  and  practis- 
ing physic  "  in  a  little  university  or  study  named 
Glasgow."  ^  But  the  rest  of  his  career  and  corre- 
spondence do  not  greatly  concern  our  subject,  except 
that  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  he  was  unable  to 
collect  debts  due  to  him  in  London,  where  they  called 
him  an  apostate  and  a  good-for-nothing  fellow  for 
leaving;  his  Order. ^ 

How  the  monks  still  left  in  the  London  Charter- 
house were  dealt  with  appears  pretty  clearly  in  a 
letter  addressed  to  Cromwell  by  the  obsequious  Bedyll 
written  from  Otford  —  no  doubt,  from  Cranmer's 
house  there — on  the  28th  August  1535,^  beginning 
as  follows : — 

As  I  am  greatly  bounden  to  you,  so  I  commend  me  heartily 
to  you.     I  am  right  sorry  to  see  the  foolishness  and  obstinacy 

1  L.  P.,  X.  605. 

^  L.  P.,  XI.  297,  which  may  possibly  be  a  year  or  two  later  than  1536, 
where  it  is  placed.  The  whole  of  Borde's  letters  are  printed  by  Dr.  Furnivall 
in  the  Early  English  Text  Society's  Extra  Series,  No.  10. 

'^  L.  P.,  VII.  1090.  See  correction  of  date  in  viii.  200.  The  text  is 
printed  in  State  Papers,  i.  422. 


24  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 


Bedyll 

wishes  the 
steadfast 
Carthus- 
ians 
were  dead. 


of  divers  religious  men,  so  addict  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and 
his  usurped  power  that  they  contemn  all  counsel,  and  like- 
wise jeopardie  their  bodies  and  souls  and  the  suppression  of 
their  houses,  as  careless  men  and  willing  to  die.  If  it  were 
not  for  the  opinion  which  men  had,  and  some  yet  have,  in 
their  apparent  holiness,  which  is  and  was,  for  the  most  part, 
covert  hypocrisy,  it  made  no  great  matter  what  became  of 
them,  so  that  their  souls  were  saved.  And  as  for  my  part, 
I  would  that  all  such  obstinate  persons  of  them  which  be 
willing  to  die  for  the  advancement  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome's 
authority  were  dead  indeed  by  God's  hand,  that  no  man 
should  run  wrongfully  into  obloquy  for  their  just  punish- 
ment. For  the  avoiding  whereof,  and  for  the  charity  that  I 
owe  to  their  bodies  and  souls,  I  have  taken  some  pains  to 
reduce  them  from  their  errors,  and  will  take  more  if  I  be 
commanded  specially,  to  the  intent  that  my  sovereign  lord 
the  King's  Grace  should  not  be  troubled  or  disquieted  with 
their  extreme  madness  and  folly.  I  mean  this  by  divers  of 
the  Charterhouses,  and  chiefly  at  London,  but  also  by  others, 
as  by  divers  of  the  friars  at  Sion  which  be  minded  to  offer 
themselves  in  sacrifice  to  the  great  idol  of  Rome.  And  in 
their  so  minding  they  be  cursed  of  God,  as  all  others  be 
which  put  their  trust  and  confidence  in  any  man  concerning 
everlasting  life.  And  in  case  they  had  not  such  confidence 
in  the  Bishop  of  Rome  they  would  never  be  so  ready  to  lose 
their  temporal  life  for  him  and  for  his  sake,  which  is  the 
great  impostor  and  deceiver  of  the  world. 

The  writer  of  these  shameful  words  was  not  a 
mere  secular  tool  of  the  King  and  Cromwell.  He 
was  Archdeacon  of  Cornwall,  advanced,  of  course,  by 
royal  favour,  and  he  had  been  strenuously  doing  the 
King's  work  as  a  churchman.  He  had  been  getting 
the  clergy  to  preach  the  King's  title  as  Supreme 
Head  of  the  Church,  and  he  had  received  reports  of 
the  partial  success  with  which  this  new  duty  had 
been  enforced  in  the  great  monastery  of  Sion  to  which 
Dr.  Reynolds  had  belonged.  This  house  was  a  very 
special  foundation,  of  the  Order  of  St.  Austin  as 
reformed  by  St.  Bridget  of  Sweden,  and  the  full 
number  of  its  regular  inmates  was  eighty -five,  of 
whom    no   less   than   sixty  were   nuns   living   in   a 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    25 

separate  wing  of  the  building.  The  whole  staff  was 
ordained  to  consist  of  thirteen  priests  (corresponding 
to  the  number  of  the  Apostles,  including  St.  Paul) 
and  seventy- two  disciples,  among  whom  the  males 
were  four  deacons  and  eight  lay  brethren.  Of  the 
thirteen  priests  one  was  the  Confessor,  the  head  of 
the  whole  house,  and  of  the  sixty  nuns  one  was 
Abbess. 

Bedyll  reports  to  Cromwell,  as  follows,  what  Mr. 
Mores,  surveyor  of  the  lands  of  Sion,  had  informed  him 
about  the  success  of  the  efforts  to  compel  the  monks 
to  preach  the  King's  title.  The  Confessor  (Father 
Fewterer)  had  done  as  required  and  had  preached 
twice  since  a  visit  which  Bedyll  had  paid  to  the  place 
in  company  with  the  Bishop  of  London  (Stokesley). 
Master  David  Curson  had  done  the  same,  though  he 
once  brought  in  the  words  mea  culpa  out  of  frame — 
perhaps  by  inadvertence.  On  Sunday  last,  however, 
one  Whitford  had  preached — one  of  the  most  wilful, 
Bedyll  calls  him — and  said  nothing  about  the  King's 
title.  On  St.  Bartholomew's  Day  one  Ricot  complied 
with  the  order,  but  said  that  he  who  commanded 
him  so  to  preach  should  discharge  his  conscience — 
thus  laying  the  responsibility  either  on  the  Bishop  of 
London  or  on  the  Confessor.  But  when  he  began  The  monks 
to  declare  the  King's  title,  nine  of  the  brethren,  nofj^g^ar^^ 
whose  names  Bedyll  gives,  immediately  left.  Bedyll  the  King's 
seriously  thought  that  as  Cromwell  was  then  at  a  ^^ecLred  • 
distance  it  would  be  better  to  forbid  them  preaching 
at  all  till  his  return,  or  else  to  see  that  those  who  did 
preach  did  their  duty  in  declaring  the  King's  title, 
and  that  others  did  not  go  away  from  the  sermon. 
He  suggested  also  that  some  of  the  King's  servants 
thereabouts  should  be  present  at  their  sermons  and 
report  them. 

I  have  shown  already  how  Father  Fewterer  on  his 
deathbed  repented  of  having  counselled  resistance  to 
the  King's   supremacy.     Here  we  find  him  already 


26    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

but  a  few    submissive  in  August  1535  ;  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
^^   , ,      two  of  the  nine  rebellious  brethren  who  left  the  church 

brought 

to  con-  during  Ricot's  sermon  were  afterwards  brought  to 
formity.  couformity  by  Bishop  Stokesley.  Their  names  were 
Copynger  and  Lache.  The  course  of  events  brought 
home  to  them  a  lesson  which,  however  they  disliked 
it  at  first,  seemed  to  have  real  arguments  in  its  favour; 
and  like  Father  Fewterer  himself,  they  were  anxious 
to  persuade  the  Carthusians  to  give  up  resistance  to 
the  royal  will.  By  that  time,  probably,  the  London 
Charterhouse  had  got  a  new  prior,  not,  certainly,  of 
its  own  election.  In  April  1535  the  Royal  Commis- 
sioners for  the  valuation  of  spiritual  benefices  in 
Nottinghamshire  sat  in  the  Carthusian  priory  of 
Beauvale,  and  declared  to  the  monks  that  the  King 
was  of  right  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church.  The  prior 
was  then  absent  in  London ;  but  William  Trafford, 
proctor  of  the  house,  answered  boldly,  "  I  believe 
firmly  that  the  Pope  of  Rome  is  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  Catholic,"  and  on  being  asked  if  he  would 
stand  to  his  words,  he  replied,  "  Even  to  death."  He 
wrote  down  the  words  himself,  and  was  committed  to 
the  custody  of  the  Sheriff,  who  was  one  of  the  Com- 
missioners.^ But  William  Trafford,  too,  experienced 
a  change,  however  it  may  have  come  about ;  and  just 
Anew  a  twelvemonth  later,  in  April  1536,  he  was  appointed 
oierMiV^*  by  Cromwell  Prior  of  the  London  Charterhouse,  on 
brethren,  which  he  wcut  up  to  pay  his  respects  to  his  patron 
with  a  letter  of  recommendation  from  Henry  Man, 
Prior  of  Sheen,  another  convert  to  royal  supremacy.^ 

It  was  about  this  time,  certainly  in  1536,  that 
Copynger  and  Lache,  writing  partly  in  behalf  of 
Father  Fewterer,  endeavoured  to  dissuade  the  brethren 
of  the  London  Charterhouse  from  continuing  their 
resistance  to  royal  supremacy.  The  writers  urged 
them  to  believe  that  their  own  conformity  and  that 

1  L.  P.,  VIII.  560,  692. 
^  L.  P.,  VIII.  585,  which  is  misplaced  in  1535. 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    27 

of  others  was  conscientious,  and  not  dictated  by  fear 
of  bodily  pain,  penury,  death,  or  shame,  or  worldly 
loss.  They  found  arguments  to  absolve  all  doubts 
and  scruples.  If  any  of  the  Carthusians  would  not 
obey  the  power  ^  that  God  had  set  to  be  obeyed,  "  his 
prince,  I  mean,"  says  the  writer,  "  nor  his  prelate,"  if 
he  had  learning  to  defend  his  position,  he  could  be 
answered.  Obedience  was  due  to  a  prince  or  prelate 
if  it  was  not  expressly  against  the  law  of  God.  They 
had  considered  the  matter  much,  and  given  papers 
containinoj  the  result  of  their  labours  to  the  Prior  of 
Sheen.  They  had  found  arguments  both  in  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  in  favour  of  the  King's 
authority,  and  none  whatever  for  "  the  Bishop  of 
Eome's."  As  to  the  supremacy,  if  there  was  any 
Church  in  England  the  King  was  suj^reme.  St.  Paul 
counselled  obedience  to  the  higher  power.  It  was 
true  that  the  King  did  in  the  spiritualty  what  other 
princes  had  not  done  before  ;  but  this  was  not  against 
God's  law,  for  it  was  admitted  that  the  Pope  might 
license  a  layman  to  be  judge  in  a  spiritual  cause,  and 
if  so  it  was  lawful  for  a  prince  to  be  judge  in  spiritual 
causes,  and  so  forth.  ^ 

Were  such  reasonings  sound  ?  To  men  who  upheld 
that  the  Pope  had  a  divine  authority  as  head  of  a 
universal  Church,  of  course  they  could  never  be  so. 
To  us  it  may  appear  that  there  was  a  good  deal  of 
truth  in  them.  But  it  is  clear  enough  that  to  religious 
men  of  that  generation — even  to  the  very  men  who 
were  using  these  arguments  —  they  would  have 
appeared  of  little  weight  but  for  the  formidable 
coercive  power  by  which  royal  supremacy  was 
enforced.     Yet  there  was  a  far  greater  trial  than  that 

^  The  word  in  the  MS.  looks  very  like  "  priour,"  written  with  a  contraction 
over  the  p  to  represent  "ri,"  and  it  may  very  well  be  that  the  writers  were 
thinking  of  the  new  prior  Trafi'ord,  whom  most  of  the  Carthusians  would  not 
acknowledge.  But  if  we  ignore  the  ambiguous  contraction,  the  word  is 
simply  "pour,"  i.e.  power,  which  harmonises  better  with  the  sense. 

^  L.  P.,  VIII.  78,  misplaced  in  1535.  The  letter  is  printed  in  full,  but  not 
very  accurately,  in  Smythe's  Historical  Account  of  Charterhouse,  pp.  64-70, 


28  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Conflicts  of  of  coercion  itself — the  tears  and  groans  and  expostula- 
feeiing.  tions  of  kinsmen  and  friends  urging  the  most  steadfast 
to  abandon  the  fundamental  principles  of  their  Order. 
The  way,  indeed,  was  free  for  any  of  them  to  leave 
the  Order  itself.  "  But,  thank  God,"  says  Chauncy, 
"such  was  their  holiness  of  life,  their  constancy  of 
mind,  their  modesty  in  speech,  their  cheerfulness  of 
countenance,  their  alacrity  in  doing,  their  moderation 
in  all  things,  that  all  who  saw  them  were  confounded. 
Though  bereft  of  an  outward  prior,  and  made  orphans 
without  a  father,  yet  to  each  of  them  his  conscience  was 
a  prior,  inwardly  directing  and  instructing  them  in  all 
things."  ^  Troubled,  no  doubt,  at  meeting  with  such 
resistance,  Mr.  Secretary  Cromwell  was  "  much  busied  " 
about  the  Charterhouse  monks,  and  it  was  difficult  to 
"  get  him  in  a  good  mood  "  for  other  subjects.^ 

The  process  by  which  some  monks  in  different 
Orders  were  subdued  to  the  King's  will  was  a  gradual 
one.  In  December  1535,  Copynger  and  Lache  of  Sion 
had  not  yet  been  brought  into  conformity.  But 
hopes  were  entertained  of  important  conquests,  even 
in  the  great  monastery  to  which  they  belonged. 
Among  the  monks  the  King's  clerical  tools,  Richard 
Layton  and  Bedyll,  even  with  the  aid  of  Dr.  Buttes 
and  Shaxton,  the  Queen's  almoner,  were  as  yet  making 
little  progress  in  persuasion  ;  but  with  the  nuns  things 
looked  somewhat  better.  Lord  Windsor  had  a  sister 
and  some  relations  among  them,  whom  he  was  naturally 
very  anxious  to  win  over  to  compliance.  The  con- 
version of  the  Confessor,  of  course,  was  a  great 
assistance.  On  the  16th  the  Confessor  and  Bishop 
Stokesley  came  into  the  women's  chapter-house,  and 
both  declared  to  them  that  upon  their  consciences 
and  the  peril  of  their  souls  they  considered  that  the 
ladies  ought  to  consent  to  the  King's  title.  This 
promised  to  smooth  matters,  and  Layton  and  Bedyll 
fancied   they  saw   an   easy  way  to  victory.      They 

^  Historia  aliquot  Martyrum,  pp.  110-11.  ^  L.  P.,  ix.  950, 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    29 

desired  such  of  the  ladies  as  agreed  to  acknowledge 
the  King's  title  to  sit  still,  and  those  who  refused  it  to 
leave  the  chapter-house.  Not  one  of  the  nuns  left  her 
seat.  But  this  did  not  exactly  mean  complete  agree- 
ment ;  more  probably  the  feeling  was  that  Lay  ton 
and  Bedyll  had  no  proper  authority  to  address  them. 
One  Agnes  Smith  was  urgent  with  several  of  the  The  nuns 
other  sisters  not  to  allow  their  convent  seal  to  be  ''^^^^^^^ 
attached  to  any  act  of  submission ;  and  apparently 
she  prevailed,  for  among  the  numerous  monastic 
acknowledgments  of  supremacy  in  the  Record  Office 
we  do  not  find  one  of  the  monastery  of  Sion,  not  even 
of  the  nuns.^ 

As  to  the  Carthusians,  it  was  suggested  by  Bishop 
Hilsey,  whom  the  King  had  appointed  as  Fisher's 
successor  in  the  See  of  Rochester,  that  the  monks 
should  be  taken  to  Paul's  Cross  every  week  to  hear 
the  sermon  there,  "  that  their  hearts  might  be 
lightened  by  knowledge,  their  bodies  escape  such 
pains  as  they  were  worthy  to  sufier,  and  their  souls 
escape  the  judgment  of  God  for  such  demerits  as  their 
ignorant  hearts  had  conceived."^  This  highly  spiritual 
advice  seems  to  have  been  acted  upon,  for  by 
Cromwell's  orders  one  Sunday  morning  four  of  the  FourCar- 
Charterhouse  monks  were  seized  during  the  celebra-  t^.^^^if^i* 

•     1  PI  11  seized  at 

tion  of  mass,  carried  out  of  the  convent,  and  taken  mass, 
to  St.  Paul's  to  hear  a  bishop  preach,  who  was 
probably  no  other  than  Hilsey  himself.  They  were 
brought  to  the  usual  place  in  custody  of  the  Sheriffs 
of  London,  and  after  the  sermon  they  were  sent 
home  again.  But  they  were  not  edified  by  what 
they  heard.  ^ 

It  appears,  indeed,  that  one  of  the  four  who  was 
to  have  been  taken  to  hear  the  sermon  was  that  day 
the  celebrant  at  the  mass,  and  the  officers  had  the 
grace  to  let  him  go  on  with  the  function.  They  put 
another  in  his  place  to  make  up  the  number.     But 

1  i.  p.,  IX.  986.  ^  L.  P.,  IX.  989.  »  Cliauncy,  p.  111. 


30    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

now  it  was  resolved  to  use  stronger  measures,  and  the 
four  whose  names  had  been  put  down  to  be  taken  to 
Paul's  Cross  were  seized  on  the  4th  May  1536,  the 
and  sent  to  anniversary  of  the  prior's  martyrdom,  and  sentto  two 
the  North.  Q^j^gj.  monasteries  belonging  to  the  Order  in  the  North. 
"  For  four  entire  years,"  says  Chauncy  (that  is  to  say, 
from  1534  to  1537),  "we  had  to  endure  very  special 
troubles  during  the  months  of  May  and  June,  though 
by  no  means  left  in  peace  at  other  seasons."  ^  The 
four  monks  who  were  thus  dealt  with  were,  first  John 
Eochester  and  James  Walworth — these  two  were  sent 
to  the  Charterhouse  of  Hull ;  and  next,  John  Fox 
and  Chauncy  himself,  who  were  committed  to  that 
of  Beauvale  in  Nottinghamshire.  "  The  King's 
councillors  then  thought,"  says  Chauncy,  "  to  lay 
hands  on  those  who  were  left,  as  if  they  had  been 
without  wall,  or  bars,  or  doors.  And  they  came  with 
gaping  mouth  to  seize  and  disperse  the  flock ;  but, 
blessed  be  God,  who  did  not  give  them  a  prey  to  their 
teeth,  they  remained  immovable  and  steady  upon  a 
rock."     The  councillors  then  sent  eight  of  them  to 

o 

the  Bridgettine  house  of  Sion  to  hear  the  exhortation 
of  the  dying  Father  Fewterer,  of  which  we  have 
already  heard.  But  though  some  of  them  were  half 
persuaded  at  the  moment  that  he  was  right,  when 
they  got  back  to  their  own  house  they  were  again 
firm  in  resisting  the  royal  counsels.  The  opposition 
of  the  brethren  was  undoubtedly  strengthened  by 
corporate  feeling,  and  the  consciousness  that  weakness 
in  one  or  two  of  them  would  have  encouraged  the 
King  to  put  the  rest  to  death.^ 

Archbishop  Lee  of  York,  however,  had  already  won 
over  the  priors  of  the  Carthusian  houses  of  Hull  and 
Mountgrace.  They  and  other  heads  of  houses  had 
come  to  him  for  counsel  what  to  do  in  times  of  so 
great  peril,  and  he  had  always  counselled  them  to  do 
as  he  himself  had  done,  and  many  others  "  both  great 

1  Chauncy,  p.  112.  2  jhid.,  pp.  113,  114. 


CH.  1   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    31 

learned  men  and  taken  for  good  men."  "  The  priors 
of  Hull  and  Mountgrace,"  he  wrote  to  the  King,  "  were 
sore  bent  rather  to  die  than  to  yield  to  this  your  royal 
style,  but  I  have  persuaded  both  to  change  their 
opinions."  ^ 

Just  after  this,  by  the  middle  of  March  1536,  the  The  sup- 
Act  had  been  passed  for  the  suppression  of  all  the  fiig^JJ^aikr 
smaller  monasteries  with  revenues  under  £200  a  monas- 
year.  With  what  pressure  the  servile  Parliament  **^"^^" 
was  induced  to  pass  this  measure  we  need  not  in- 
quire. There  was  a  tradition  in  a  later  generation, 
that  a  comprehensive  measure  on  these  lines  had 
been  in  contemplation  some  years  before,  and  that 
Convocation  had  been  urged  to  consent  under  threat 
of  the  King's  displeasure,  but  that  Bishop  Fisher 
had  warned  them  in  a  fable  that  the  axe  which  cut 
down  small  trees  would  in  time  leave  a  whole  forest 
bare.^  We  cannot  well  feel  much  certainty  of  the 
truth  of  this  story,  but  we  are  in  no  great  danger  of 
error  if  we  regard  the  royal  visitation  of  the  monas- 
teries set  on  foot  in  the  autumn  of  1535,  as  having 
been  designed  to  smooth  the  way  for  a  large  confisca- 
tion of  monastic  property.  Of  this  I  shall  speak 
more  at  large  in  the  next  chapter.  Here  sufiice  it  to 
say  that  two  principal  agents,  Dr.  Thomas  Legh  and 
Dr.  Richard  Layton,  commissioned  by  the  King's 
Vicegerent,  Cromwell,  traversed  the  West,  South,  and 
North  of  England  in  the  course  of  a  few  months, 
visiting  the  monasteries,  giving  injunctions  which  it 
was  hard  to  keep,  and  which  were  well  calculated  to 
promote  applications  to  Cromwell  for  dispensations, 
and  sending  reports  of  gross  scandals  and  disgusting 
impurities  which  they  professed  to  have  discovered  in 
two -thirds  of  the  houses  they  visited.  That  these 
reports  were  ever  seen  by  the  persons  accused,  or 
that  they  were  ever  submitted  to  Parliament,  as 
historians  for  a  long  time  believed,  there  is  no  evidence 

1  L.P.,  X.  93,  99.  2  Ortroy,  pp.  222-4, 


32  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

whatever  to  show ;  and  apart  from  the  questionable 
characters  of  the  visitors  and  the  extreme  rapidity 
with  which  they  did  their  work,  a  good  deal  can  be 
shown  to  discredit  several  of  their  statements  in 
detail.  Reports,  moreover,  of  a  totally  different 
character  were  made  not  very  long  afterwards  by  a 
number  of  the  local  gentry  in  different  counties, 
acting  under  a  royal  commission.  But  the  general 
effect  of  the  reports  of  the  Visitors  was  declared  by 
the  King  himself  to  the  House  of  Commons,  which 
he  seems  to  have  visited  on  purpose,  and  the  bill  for 
the  confiscation  of  the  smaller  houses  was  passed  with 
a  preamble  declaring  (quite  against  the  tenor  of  the 
secret  reports)  that  while  vice  and  abominable  living 
abounded  in  houses  where  there  were  fewer  than 
twelve  inmates,  good  discipline  prevailed  in  larger 
monasteries,  to  which  it  would  be  advisable  to 
transfer  the  demoralised  brethren  of  those  smaller 
houses.^ 

At  the  same  time  there  was  a  judicious  provision 
in  the  Act,  that  the  King  might  grant,  by  patent 
under  the  Great  Seal,  licences  to  certain  of  those 
minor  monasteries  to  continue — a  faculty  of  which 
he  made  use  in  a  considerable  number  of  instances, 
when  a  sufficient  sum  of  money  was  offered  by  those 
interested.  This  was  frequently  done  by  neighbours, 
for  of  course  houses  whose  revenues  were  so  small 
could  not  easily  afford  the  sum  that  was  re- 
quisite ;  but  the  monasteries,  on  the  whole,  were 
popular,  and  many  of  them  in  particular  situations 
discharged  specially  useful  functions,  or  were  endeared 
by  old  associations  to  families  of  wealth  and  rank. 
Hull  Charterhouse  was  one  of  those  for  which  inter- 
cession was  made.  The  townsmen  of  Hull  thought  it 
deserved  to  stand  on  account  of  the  virtuous  living 
and  hospitality  of  the  monks ;  and  though  its  revenues 
were  under  £200  a  year  it  was  spared  for  a  payment 

1  Stat.  27  Hen.  VIII.  c.  28. 


cH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     33 

into  the  Exchequer  of  £233,  6s.  8d/  It  would  hardly 
have  been  so  if  the  prior  and  his  brethren  had  not 
been  persuaded  to  accept  the  royal  supremacy  ; 
against  which,  evidently,  Rochester  and  Walworth 
stood  alone  in  their  protest. 

It  would  seem  that  John  Rochester,  after  the 
death  of  Prior  Houghton,  must  at  least  have  held 
an  informal  position  among  the  brethren  in  London  The  Cai- 
as  a  monk  of  special  zeal.  Early  in  August,  ^^^^'^i^^i^- 
Cranmer  as  Archbishop  had  sent  for  him  and 
Nicholas  Rawlins  to  converse  with  them  and  bring 
them  over.  AVith  Rawlins  he  succeeded,  but  he  was 
obliged  to  send  Rochester  back  to  the  Charterhouse 
unaltered  in  his  devotion  to  Rome."^  Later,  as  we 
have  seen,  Bedyll  and  Crome  bestowed  long  exhorta- 
tions upon  him  and  Fox  to  no  purpose,  and  when 
copies  of  The  Defence  of  Peace  were  given  to  the 
monks,  he  apparently  was  the  "president"  to  whom 
they  referred  the  question  whether  they  should  read 
the  book,  and  at  whose  command  they  returned  the 
volumes  unread  to  Filoll.  On  further  exhortation 
he  consented  to  read  over  one  copy  himself,  but  after 
keeping  it  four  or  five  days  he  burned  it.^  He  and 
Walworth,  of  whose  previous  history  less  is  known, 
remained  in  the  Hull  Charterhouse  during  the  great 
commotions  in  the  North  in  the  winter  of  1536-37. 
With  these  risings  they  do  not  seem  in  any  way 
to  have  been  mixed  up.  The  risings  themselves,  The 
indeed,  were  mainly  due  to  the  general  dislike  of  R°5n^^" 
heresy  and  of  the  first  steps  taken  in  the  suppression 
of  the  monasteries.  But  these  Carthusian  monks, 
living  within  their  cloisters,  were  not  insurgents  and 
did  not  favour  insurrection.  It  was  the  laity  who 
were  alarmed  at  the  new  tendencies  of  things,  more 
than  any  monks  or  clergy.     The  legislation  of  the 

^  L.  p.,  X.  980.     Comp.  Gasquet's  Henry  VIII.  and  the  Enqlish  Mmiaa- 
teries,  ii.  530  (ed.  1888-89). 

2  L.  P.,  VIII.  283.  ^  See  above,  p.  15. 

VOL.   II  D 


34  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

last  Parliament  had  been  revolutionary  and  destructive 
of  ancient  authority ;  and  the  insurgents,  perfectly 
loyal  to  the  King,  wished  the  removal  and  punish- 
ment of  wicked  councillors  like  Cromwell  and  Riche, 
and  of  heretical  bishops  like  Cranmer  and  Latimer. 
They  wanted  a  free  Parliament  to  revise  the  recent 
revolutionary  legislation,  and  to  relieve  them  of  the 
fear  of  new  inordinate  confiscations.  And  so  formid- 
able was  the  revolt  that  Norfolk,  sent  to  quell  it,  was 
obliged  to  temporise.  He  quieted  the  people  by  a 
promise,  which  he  was  understood  to  have  given  by 
authority,  that  there  should  be  a  free  Parliament  in 
the  North  of  Eng-land  for  the  consideration  and 
redress  of  grievances. 

But  there  soon  appeared  reasons  for  doubting 
the  good  faith  of  the  Government,  and  there  was 
serious  danger  of  a  new  commotion  in  the  North,  of 
which  Hallom's  attempt  to  get  possession  of  Hull 
was  one  of  the  first  indications.  Indeed,  new  com- 
motions did  occur,  even  after  the  failure  of  this  and 
of  Bigod's  rebellion  in  Yorkshire,  in  the  region  farther 
west,  south  of  Carlisle.  The  Duke  of  Norfolk  came 
down  again  into  the  North,  not,  as  had  been  expected, 
to  complete  the  pacification  of  which  he  had  given 
hopes,  but  to  administer  severe  punishment  to  all 
new  off'enders.  He  was  called  to  Carlisle  by  the 
disturbances  in  the  West,  and  after  doing  "  dreadful 
execution  "  there,  returned  to  Newcastle  and  so  into 
Yorkshire,  where  he  visited  Hull  in  the  middle  of 
March  and  was  at  York  a  little  later.  At  Hull  he 
seems  to  have  called  Rochester,  and  probably  Wal- 
worth also,  before  him,  when  Rochester  said  he  was 
ready  to  prove  that  the  King  had  been  deluded  by 
false  counsel  to  assume  the  title  of  Supreme  Head. 
This  he  told  the  Duke  he  had  already  declared  to 
Bedyll  and  others  in  London,  and  he  even  sent  a 
letter  to  Norfolk  ^  after  the  Duke  had  left  Hull,  asking 

1  L.  p.,  XII.  i.  778. 


CH.  I  FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     35 

that  he  might  have  an  opportunity  to  put  the  matter 
before  the  King  himself.  He  trusted  that  Norfolk's 
influence  might  be  of  use  in  this,  as  it  had  already 
been  on  a  very  important  point  not  long  before.  For 
it  was  through  Norfolk  that  the  King  had  "  staid 
Purgatory  " — a  point  which  deserves  a  word  or  two 
of  retrospective  notice. 

In  June  1534,  when  the  encouragement  of  heretical 
preachers  was  important  to  support  the  Anne  Boleyn 
marriage  against  the  Pope,  Archbishop  Cranmer  issued 
an  order  to  the  clergy  of  his  Province,  inhibiting  all 
persons  from  preaching  either  for  or  against  Purgatory 
and  some  other  disputed  doctrines  for  one  year.^ 
Like  order,  of  course,  was  taken  for  the  province  of 
York,  where  Archbishop  Lee  mentions  that  the  year 
w^as  to  expire  at  Whitsunday  1535.^  A  definite 
decision  was  expected  to  be  promulgated  by  that 
time  as  to  the  sort  of  doctrine  that  was  to  be  sanc- 
tioned by  royal  authority.  But  the  time  was  allowed 
to  lapse,  and  Archbishop  Lee  received  instructions  in 
January  1536  still  to  avoid  contrariety  in  preaching 
against  novel  opinions,  but  to  repress  the  temerity  of 
adherents  of  "the  Bishop  of  Eome."^  When  Parlia- 
ment met  next  month  the  members  were  abundantly 
supplied  with  a  number  of  new  printed  books  designed 
to  provoke  legislation  against  images,  adoration  of 
Saints,  and  the  doctrine  of  Purgatory.*  In  the  spring 
the  bishops  held  conferences  on  the  subject  with 
Cranmer  at  Lambeth  ;  but  before  the  end  of  April  the 
King  came  to  a  determination  about  it,  and  preachers 
were  ordered  to  avoid  new  opinions  and  return  to  the 
old  fashion  of  preaching."'  That  this  decision  was  due 
largely  to  the  influence  of  Norfolk,  Father  Rochester's 
letter  shows,  and  it  is  what  we  might  otherwise  pretty 

^  L.  P.,  VII.  464,  871.  From  the  date  of  Chapuys's  letter  (871)  it  is  clear 
this  order  was  given  some  time  after  the  inhibition,  No.  463,  which  was  in 
Easter  week. 

2  L.  P.,  IX.  704.  •"  L.  P.,  X.  172. 

■•  L.  P.,  X.  282.     Corap.  528,  619.  ^  L.  P.,  x.  601,  752,  831. 


36    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  hi 

well  expect.  Norfolk  was  always  in  favour  of  old 
orthodoxy,  as  far  as  he  might  be  allowed  to  support 
it. 

But  to  be  asked  to  send  to  the  King  an  obstinate 
Carthusian,  who,  when  refreshed  with  proper  diet — 
for  it  seems  that  he  was  much  debilitated  at  the  very 
time  he  wrote — hoped  to  maintain  in  the  face  of 
royalty  that  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  was  unlawful, 
was  altogether  out  of  the  question.  In  writing  to 
Cromwell,  Norfolk  wondered  how  the  man  was  ever 
sent  into  those  parts  at  all,  when  he  had  shown  his 
opinion  to  Mr.  Bedyll  and  others  in  London.  Why 
was  he  not  put  to  execution  there  ?  ^  His  letter,  of 
course,  which  the  Duke  forwarded  to  Cromwell, 
showed  him  in  the  opinion  of  the  Council  to  be  a 
rank  traitor,  and  the  Duke  was  instructed,  if  he 
persisted  in  his  opinions,  to  deal  with  him  as  such. 
A  month  later  the  Duke,  who  had  been  at  Sheriff- 
button,  returned  for  a  day  to  York  and  had  before 
him  Rochester  and  Walworth,  indicted  for  denial  of 
Two  more  the  Kiuof's  suprcmacy."^  They  were  hanged  in  chains 
marlyrf "  ^t  York  OTi  the  11th  May.^ 

Just  one  week  later  came  a  great  crisis  in  the 

London  Charterhouse.     Under  a   new  prior,   placed 

over  them  by  Cromwell  to  bring  about  compliance 

with  the  King's  will,  persuasions,  of  course,  were  not 

wanting,    and    Archdeacon    Bedyll,    backed    up    by 

Richard  Gwent,  the  Archdeacon  of  London,  pressed 

them  harder  than  before,  and  succeeded  in  bringing 

lu  Loudon  about  a  division  in  the  community.     Nineteen  of  the 

mS^som'e    uiouks  wcrc   wou   ovcr,  and  unwillingly  joined  the 

die  in        prior  in  taking;  the  oath  of  supremacy.     They  took 

Drison  .  ... 

it,  as  Chauncy  plainly  says,  against  their  consciences,, 
with  qualifications  which  they  were  allowed  to  make, 
and  hoping  that  their  compliance  would  avert  the 
complete  destruction  of  their  house.     But  ten  others 

1  /..  p.,  xn.  i.  777.  -  L.  P.,  xii.  i.  846,  1156,  1172. 

•'  Cliauncy,  p.  118. 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL     37 

remained  refractory.  Two  documents  were  drawn 
up  by  a  notary  of  the  submission  on  the  18tli  May 
1537.' 

The  ten  who  remained  faithful  to  their  principles 
were  allowed  but  eleven  days'  rest.  On  the  29th 
May  they  were  committed  to  the  filthy  prison  of 
Newgate,  where  with  stench  and  squalor  they  all  of 
them  but  one  gradually  succumbed  to  fate.  The 
single  survivor  three  years  later,  on  the  4th  November 
1540,  was  brought  out  to  suffer  a  martyrdom  like 
that  of  his  prior — the  brutal  punishment  awarded  to 
high  treason.^ 

The  conformity  of  the  majority  did  not  save  the 
house  from  ultimate  extinction.  On  the  10th  June 
it  was  surrendered  by  Prior  Trafford  in  the  name  of 
the  convent,  with  a  formal  confession  that  the  majority 
had  provoked  the  King  by  their  offences,  and  deserved 
the  severest  death  as  well  as  the  confiscation  of  the 
property  of  their  priory,  and  that  they  thought  it 
best  to  throw  themselves  upon  the  King's  mercy. ^ 
Four  days  later  Archdeacon  Bedyll  informed  Cromwell, 
in  the  following  cold-blooded  letter,  of  the  process 
which  was  gradually  going  on  in  Newgate  : — 

My  very  good  Lord,  after  my  most  hearty  commendations, 
it  shall  please  your  Lordship  to  understand  that  the  monks 
of  the  Charterhouse  here  at  London,  which  were  committed 
to  Newgate  for  their  traitorous  behaviour  longtime  continued 
against  the  King's  Grace,  be  almost  despatched  by  the  hand 
of  God,  as  it  may  appear  to  you  by  this  bill  enclosed; 
whereof,  considering  their  Ijehaviour  and  the  whole  matter, 
I  am  not  sorry,  but  would  that  all  such  as  love  not  the  King's 
Highness  and  his  worldly  honor  were  in  like  case.  My 
Lords,  as  ye  may,  I  desire  you  in  the  way  of  charity,  and 
none  otherwise,  to  be  good  lord  to  the  prior  of  the  said 
Charterhouse,  which  is  as  honest  a  man  as  ever  was  in  that 
habit  (or  else  I  am  much  deceived),  and  is  one  which  never 

1  L.  P.,  XII.  i.  1232,  1233  ;  Chaimcy,  p.  115. 

^  Chauncy,  pp.  116,  117.     See  correction  of  date  in  Annotations,  p.  145. 

^  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  64. 


38    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

offended  the  King's  Grace  by  disobedience  of  his  laws,  but 
hath  labored  very  sore  continually  for  the  reformation  of 
his  brethren,  and  now  at  the  last,  at  mine  exhortation  and 
instigation,  constantly  moved  and  finally  persuaded  his 
brethren  to  surrender  their  house,  lands,  and  goods  into  the 
King's  hands  and  to  trust  only  to  his  mercy  and  grace.  I 
beseech  you,  my  Lord,  that  the  said  Prior  may  be  so  entreated 
by  your  help  that  he  be  not  sorry  and  repent  that  he  hath 
feared  and  followed  your  sore  words  and  my  gentle  exhorta- 
tion made  unto  him  to  surrender  his  said  house,  and  think 
that  he  might  have  kept  the  same  if  your  Lordship  and  I  had 
not  led  him  to  the  said  surrender.  But  surely  I  believe  that 
I  know  the  man  so  well  that  how  so  ever  he  be  order[ed]  he 
will  be  contented  without  grudge  ;  he  is  a  man  of  such  charity 
as  I  have  not  seen  the  like. 

As  touching  the  house  of  the  Charterhouse,  I  pray  God, 
if  it  shall  please  the  King  to  alter  it,  that  it  may  be  turned 
into  a  better  use,  seeing  it  is  in  the  face  of  our  world,  and 
much  communication  will  run  thereof  throughout  this  realm  ; 
for  London  is  the  common  country  of  all  England,  from 
which  is  derived  to  all  parts  of  this  realm  all  good  and  ill 
occurrent  here. 

From  London  the  14th  day  of  June. 

By  your  Lordship's  at  commandment, 

Thomas  Bedyll. 

The  enclosure  is  as  follows  : — 

There  be  departed : — Brother  William  Greenewode,  Dan 
John  Davye,  Brother  Robert  Salt,  Brother  Walter  Peereson, 
Dan  Thomas  (Treene. 

There  be  even  at  the  point  of  death  : — Brother  Thomas 
Scryven,  Brother  Thomas  Reedyng. 

There  be  sick : — Dan  Thomas  Johnson,  Brother  William 
Horn. 

One  is  whole : — Dan  Bere.^ 

So  it  appears  that  it  was  only  by  "  sore  words  "  on 
the  part  of  Cromwell,  as  well  as  "gentle  exhortation" 
on  that  of  Bedyll,  that  Prior  Trafford,  who  a  year 
before  he  was  made  head  of  the  house  had  expressed 

^  MS.  Cott.,  Cleop.  E  iv.  217.  Printed  in  Ellis'  Letters  (1  S.  ii.  76)  and 
Wright's  Suppression  of  the  Monasteries,  p.  162.  But  Wright  omits  the 
enclosure,  and  Ellis  misreads  two  names  in  the  list. 


surrender 
of  the 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    39 

himself  as  ready  to  die  for  the  Pope's  supremacy,  was 
induced  both  to  make  the  surrender  and  get  his 
brethren's  consent  almost  to  the  very  thing  that  they 
had  taken  an  unwilling  oath  in  order  to  avoid.  It 
was  important  that  he  should  be  rewarded  for  his 
submissiveness  in  such  a  way  that  he  should  not 
repent  it.  In  his  behalf,  at  least,  Bedyll  could  write 
'*  in  the  way  of  charity." 

Did  Prior  Trafford  not  repent  it?  We  have  no 
record  of  his  feelins^s.^  The  one  thing  which  is 
beyond  all  question  is  that  the  surrender  was  forced.  Forced 
The  King  had  set  his  mind  on  the  complete  suppres- 
sion of  the  Charterhouse,  had  got  Prior  Trafibrd's  aid  house. 
to  win  over  as  many  of  the  brethren  as  possible  to 
consent  to  the  act,  and  was  determined  to  get  rid  of 
the  rest  by  a  process  of  slow  murder  in  Newgate.  It 
appears  that  an  old  MS.,  preserved  long  ago  among 
the  English  Carthusian  exiles,  gave  an  obituary  of 
those  poor  sufferers,  showing  the  date  on  which 
each  of  them  departed  to  God ;  and  the  record  is  in 
complete  conformity  with  the  above  list.  William 
Greenwood  died  on  the  6th  June,  John  Davy  on  the 
8th,  Robert  Salt  on  the  9th,  Walter  Pierson  and 
Thomas  Green  on  the  10th,  Thomas  Scriven  on  the 
15th,  and  Thomas  Reding  on  the  16th  ;  while  Richard 
Beer — the  only  one  above  described  as  "whole"  on 
the  14th  June — did  not  die  till  the  9th  August;  and 
Thomas  Johnson,  though  sick  on  the  14th  June, 
held  out  till  the  20th  September.'-  That  some  of 
them  lived  so  long  after  a  time  excited  the  King's 
astonishment,  who  suspecting,  what  was  indeed  the 
case,  that  private  sympathy  had  come  to  the  aid  of 
the  afflicted,  caused  a  stricter  watch  to  be  kept  over 
them.  For  in  truth  a  kind-hearted  young  woman 
named  Margaret   Clement,  whose  mother  had   been 

*  He  got  only  a  iiension  of  £20  a  year  for  his  pains.    Due;dale's  Monasiicon, 
vi.  10. 

-  Hendriks,  228. 


40    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

brought  up  in  Sir  Thomas  More's  household,  had 
bribed  the  jailor  to  get  access  to  them,  and,  dis- 
guisinof  herself  as  a  milkmaid,  came  to  them  "  with  a 
great  pail  upon  her  head  full  of  meat,  wherewith  she 
fed  that  blessed  company,  putting  meat  into  their 
mouths,  they  being  tied  and  not  able  to  stir,  nor  to 
help  themselves ;  which  having  done,  she  afterwards 
took  from  them  their  natural  filth."  But  when  the 
stricter  watch  was  instituted  the  jailor  durst  not  allow 
her  the  same  free  access  as  before.  Nevertheless,  by 
importunity  and  by  the  force  of  bribes,  she  prevailed 
with  him  for  a  time  to  let  her  go  up  upon  the  roof, 
just  above  their  cells,  and,  removing  some  of  the  tiles, 
she  was  able  to  let  down  by  a  string  some  meat  in  a 
basket  and  approach  it  to  their  mouths  as  they  stood 
chained  against  the  posts.  It  was  a  troublesome 
operation,  and  the  poor  prisoners  after  all  could  not 
feed  themselves  very  effectually.  The  danger  of  dis- 
covery, moreover,  was  such  that  the  jailor  at  length 
refused  to  let  her  come  any  longer.^ 

There  were  still  two  monks  of  the  London  house, 
John  Fox  and  Maurice  Chauncy,  who,  having  been 
removed,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  priory  of  Beauvale  in 
Nottinghamshire,  had  not  even  yet  acknowledged  the 
supremacy.  In  August  1537  that  priory  was  visited 
by  Henry  Man,  prior  of  Sheen,  a  Carthusian  whom 
the  King,  having  won  him  over  to  his  supremacy, 
had  appointed  visitor  of  his  own  Order,  along  with 
John  Mitchel,  prior  of  Witham.  They  found  Fox 
and  Chauncy  "  very  scrupulous  in  the  matter  con- 
cerning the  Bishop  of  Rome,"  though  they  were  not 
obstinate  and  willingly  agreed  to  confer  upon  the 
subject  with  Copinger,  who,  since  Father  Fewterer's 
death,  had  been  appointed,  of  course  by  royal 
authority.  Confessor  of  Sion  in  his  room.     They  were 

^  Morris's  Troubles  of  our  Catholic  Forefathers  (1  Ser.),  i.  27,  28.  This 
kind-hearted  lady  died  at  an  advanced  age  at  Louvain,  where  she  liad  been 
for  more  than  fifty  years  Superior  of  the  convent  of  St.  Ursula. 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    41 

accordingly  sent  up  to  Sion,  where  they  appear  to 
have  had  leno-thened  discussions  with  the  new  Con- 
fessor  ;  to  whom  also  William  Broke  and  Bartholomew 
Burgoyn,  two  of  those  monks  still  in  the  London 
Charterhouse  who  had  once  been  sent  to  Sion  to  hear 
Father  Fewterer's  dying  exhortations,  wrote  to  thank 
him  for  the  great  pains  he  took  with  them,  hoping  that 
he  would  succeed  in  their  conversion.  "  We  have  not 
forgotten,"  they  said,  "  the  pains  and  patience  and 
longanimity  that  ye  had  with  us  when  we  were  with 
you,  and  how  hard  it  was,  and  in  a  manner  impossible, 
to  us  to  follow  your  counsel.  But  in  process  of  time 
we  did  follow  your  counsel,  thanks  be  to  Jesu.  This 
we  write,  for  we  suppose  it  to  be  thus  with  our 
brethren ;  and  if  it  be  thus,  we  instantly  desire  you 
to  continue  your  good  patience  to  them.  .  .  .  Glad 
would  we  be  to  hear  that  they  would  surrender  their 
wits  and  consciences  to  you,  that  they  might  come 
home,  and  as  bright  lanterns  show  the  light  of 
religious  conversation  amongst  us,  as  they  can  right 
well,  to  God  be  glory."  ^ 

The  reader  can  judge  from  words  like  these  what 
lengthened  arguments  it  required  to  overcome  con- 
scientious scruples  and  subvert  an  ancient  order. 
But  we  cannot  blink  the  fact  that  the  ancient  order 
was  in  the  end  effectually  subverted,  and  even 
conscience  cannot  bind  a  man  to  a  dead  master  or 
a  woman  to  a  dead  husband.  The  moral  influence 
and  political  power  of  Rome  were  tottering  to  their 
fall.  The  moral  influence  might  in  part  revive,  and 
did  so ;  but  the  political  power  was  going,  if  not 
actually  gone.  In  this  very  year,  1537,  Cardinal  Pole  cardinal 
had  been  sent  by  the  Pope  as  Legate  to  go  to  the  ^^Q^jfj^g 
Low  Countries  and  w^atch  matters  in  England,  where  mission. 
rebellion  had  broken  out  in  opposition  to  the  King's 
revolutionary  measures.  A  papal  legate  had  hitherto 
been  honoured  in  all  countries  as  the  ambassador  of 

1  Hendriks,  pp.  232-6. 


42    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

the  most  sacred  Power  on  earth.  But  such  was 
Henry's  extraordinary  influence  over  secular  princes 
that  neither  Francis  I.  nor  Mary  of  Hungary,  the 
Regent  of  the  Netherlands,  durst  give  a  public  recep- 
tion to  one  whom  the  King  of  England  denounced  as 
a  traitor  to  himself,  and  whose  delivery  to  him  as 
such  he  had  the  audacity  to  demand.  Neither 
Francis  nor  Mary  of  Hungary  desired  to  offend  the 
Pope  ;  but  to  offend  Henry  VIII.  would  have  been 
more  dangerous  still,  and  they  begged  Pole's  indul- 
gence for  not  receiving  him,  Pole  accordingly,  after 
making  a  public  entry  into  Paris  in  the  French  king's 
absence,  went  on  to  Cambray,  and  from  thence,  after 
waiting  some  time,  was  escorted  hastily  to  the  security 
of  Liege  without  having  accomplished  anything. 

The  KiuQ^  of  Eno^land  was  thus  an  absolute  sovereion 
in  his  own  realm.  There  was  no  power  on  earth  to 
control  him  within  or  without  the  kingdom ;  and  it  is 
no  wonder  that  the  scrupulous  Fox  and  Chauncy  at 
length  yielded  to  Copinger's  arguments  and  took  the 
oath  of  supremacy — a  weakness  with  which  Chauncy 
ever  afterwards  reproached  himself  as  a  grievous  sin. 
They  were  partly  reconciled  to  it,  as  their  brethren 
had  been,  by  the  belief  that  their  submission  on  this 
point  would  preserve  the  monastery  from  being  utterly 
suppressed.  In  so  thinking  they  were  deceived.  The 
work  begun  in  1536  under  the  Act  of  Parliament  for 
suppressing  the  smaller  monasteries  was  continued 
tw^o  years  later  by  other  processes,  till  in  the  year 
1540  not  a  single  monastery  was  left  in  England. 
On  the  15th  November  1538,  within  a  year  after 
Fox  and  Chauncy  had  taken  the  oath  and  been 
restored  to  their  old  priory,  the  monks  were  turned 
End  of  the  out  of  the  liousc  and  pensioned.^  Their  old  home  of 
charto-  pi^ty  was  turned  into  a  brothel  and  a  place  of 
house.        wrestling  matches  ;  the  church  was  made  a  repository 

^  Chaiincy's  original  date  of  1539  is  corrected  by  his  last  editor,  Doreau. 
See  Pref.  p.  xxi. 


CH.  I   FURTHER  TRIALS  OF  THE  FAITHFUL    43 

for  the  King's  tents,  and  tlie  altars  were  profaned  as 
gaming  tables.  At  last,  six  years  after  the  expulsion 
of  the  monks,  the  place  was  at  least  purified,  the 
buildings  being  given  to  a  courtier,  Sir  Edward  North, 
who  turned  them  into  a  private  residence,  converting 
the  church  into  a  dining-room  and  pulling  down  all 
the  cloister/ 

1  Chauncy,  pp.  119,  120. 


CHAPTER    II 


VISITATION    AND    SUPPRESSION    OF    MONASTERIES 


papal 
authority. 


Magnitude  The  overthrow  of  papal  authority  in  England,  which 
change  was  the  great  achievement  of  Henry's  reign,  has 
caused  by  brought  about  such  enormous  results,  not  merely  in 
throw  of  this,  but,  since  then,  in  every  country  in  Europe,  that 
we  can  hardly  realise  what  a  stupendous  task  he 
undertook,  and  with  what  difficulty  he  carried  it 
through.  Royal  supremacy  over  the  Church  within 
any  realm,  whether  recognised  by  that  name  or  not, 
is  really  a  universal  principle  now.  The  sovereign 
authority  is  supreme  over  all  persons  and  over  all 
causes,  whether  ecclesiastical  or  civil.  A  jurisdiction 
termed  ecclesiastical  may  still  remain,  but  it  is  not 
the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
when  bishops  had  their  own  courts  and  cited  heretics 
before  them  virtute  officii,  without  interference  from 
any  other  power.  As  Selden  put  the  matter  in  his 
Table  Talk,  "  There  is  no  such  thing  as  spiritual 
jurisdiction — all  is  civil ;  the  Church's  is  the  same 
with  the  Lord  Mayor's."  The  same,  he  meant,  as  to 
the  supreme  determining  power,  though  there  might 
be  a  distinction  in  the  tribunal  according  to  the 
nature  of  the  cause.  But  as  to  all  jurisdiction  being 
civil,  it  is  scarcely  so  in  one  sense  ;  for  civil  authority 
could  not  stand  alone  without  a  religious  sanction. 

We  are  well  satisfied,  indeed,  that  there  are  no 
Church  tribunals  now  independent  of  the  State ;  but 
we  hardly  realise  that  a  result  which  we  consider  so 

44 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  45 

wholesome  was  due  in  the  first  instance  to  unex- 
ampled tyranny  and  oppression.  Nor  was  it  the 
work  of  a  mere  commonplace  tyrant ;  for  no  such 
character  would  have  found  the  existing  system  any 
very  great  impediment  to  his  lust,  his  selfishness,  or 
his  caprice.  Henry  was  at  once  a  casuistical  and  a 
self-willed  tyrant,  professedly  observant  of  law,  but 
determined  to  carry  his  point  at  any  cost.  He  had 
with  great  difiiculty  forced  Convocation  to  acknow- 
ledge his  supremacy,  and  they  had  only  done  so  with 
a  qualification  which  they  considered  essential.  He 
got  Parliament  to  ratify  it  without  the  qualifica- 
tion. He  procured  the  most  merciless  enactments 
against  any  who  should  deny  it ;  yet  even  Parlia- 
ment, like  Convocation,  would  not  do  what  was 
required  without  putting  in  a  qualification  of  its  own. 
The  parliamentary  qualification  in  the  statute  was 
designed  to  protect  those  who  did  not  deny  the 
supremacy  "  maliciously."  But  the  lawyers  treated 
the  word  as  superfluous,  just  as  Parliament  had 
ignored  the  qualification  inserted  by  Convocation. 
And  so  the  heads  of  martyrs  fell  on  the  block,  or 
their  bodies  were  suspended  on  the  gibbet.  And  all 
this  was  done,  in  the  first  place,  to  justify  the  King's 
marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  and,  after  Anne  Boleyn's 
fall,  to  justify  the  King's  own  enactments. 

Yet  even  with  all  this  the  result  was  but  imper-  Difficulty 

fectly  achieved.     We  have  followed  the  process  so  far  Z^^^  ^^"^^ 

1  ■       •         f  ••111  ^^^ 

to  the  extmction  of  one  religfious  house — the  house  acWeved. 

which  undoubtedly  ofi'ered  most  resistance  to  the 
royal  claims.  But  the  monasteries,  without  out- 
spoken opposition,  were  a  far  greater  obstacle  than  the 
bishops  and  Convocations.  In  the  Convocations  the 
Church  of  each  province  seemed  to  have  but  one 
neck,  as  Caligula  wished  the  Eoman  people  had,  and 
the  bishops  were  helpless  after  their  Convocations  had 
yielded.  All  of  them,  except  the  Spaniard  who  was 
Bishop  of  Llandaff,  took  the  oath  of  supremacy  within 


46  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

the  space  of  little  more  than  three  months.  But  the 
monasteries  still  remained — scores  of  houses  often  in 
a  single  county,  besides  those  which  clustered  about 
the  suburbs  of  great  towns,  and  the  friaries  within 
the  precincts  of  such  towns.  Of  the  friars,  indeed, 
one  Order  had  already  been  suppressed,  namely,  the 
more  strict  Order  of  Franciscans,  who  were  called 
Observants.  Bound  to  the  rule  of  St.  Francis  in  all 
its  rigour,  unable  to  possess  property,  and  incapable 
of  being  seduced  by  the  ordinary  allurements  which 
wealth  and  power  can  place  in  the  way  of  other  men, 
the  Observants  were  popular  mainly  on  account  of 
their  known  fearlessness  and  independence.  But  it 
was  just  these  qualities  which  made  them  specially 
objectionable  to  the  King.  On  Easter  Sunday,  1532, 
the  year  before  he  married  Anne  Boleyn,  Friar  Peto, 
preaching  before  him  at  Greenwich,  warned  him 
against  sycophants  who,  like  the  lying  prophets  of 
Ahab,  encouraged  him  in  evil  counsels,  and  also 
against  the  danger  he  incurred  of  excommunication 
if  he  put  away  his  true  wife,  Katharine.  The  King 
vainly  remonstrated  with  him  at  a  private  interview, 
and  no  less  vainly  endeavoured,  in  Peto's  absence 
next  Sunday,  to  correct  the  impression  made,  by 
getting  a  chaplain  of  his  own  to  preach  a  contrary 
doctrine  in  the  same  place.  The  royal  chaplain  was 
answered  by  another  of  the  friars,  the  Warden  of  the 
Greenwich  brethren,  who,  for  his  boldness,  was  told 
by  a  nobleman  that  he  deserved  to  be  put  in  a  sack 
and  thrown  into  the  Thames.  "  Make  these  threats 
to  courtiers,"  replied  the  Warden  ;  "  the  way  lieth  as 
open  to  heaven  by  water  as  by  land."  ^ 

If  the  King  were  to  have  his  way,  such  a  dangerous 
Order,  it  was  clear,  must  be  suppressed.  One  of  the 
earliest  measures  taken  two  years  later  for  enforcing 

^  The  accounts  of  this  episode,  given  by  Sanders,  and  before  liini  by 
Harpsfield  [Fretended  Divorce,  pp.  202-205),  are  quite  in  accordance  with  the 
strictly  conteni])orary  and  independent  reports  of  the  Imperial  and  Venetian 
ambassadors  {L.  P.,  v.  941  ;   Venetian  Calendar,  iv.  No.  760). 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  47 

the  royal  supremacy,  as  may  be  seen  in  a  State  paper 
of  the  period,  had  special  reference  to  the  control  of 
the  friars  and  the  regulation  of  preaching.  The  fol- 
lowing is  the  abstract  of  this  document  given  in  the 
Calendar  of  State  Papers  : — 

All  the  Friars  of  every  monastery  in  England  must  be 
assembled  in  their  chapter  house  and  examined  separately 
concerning  their  faith  and  obedience  to  Henry  VIIL,  and 
liound  by  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  him,  Queen  Anne,  and  her 
present  and  future  issue.  They  must  be  bound  by  oath  to 
preach  and  persuade  the  people  of  the  above  at  every  oppor- 
tunity. They  must  acknowledge  the  King  as  Supreme  Head 
of  the  Church,  as  Convocation  and  Parliament  have  decreed. 
They  must  confess  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  has  no  more 
authority  than  other  bishops.  They  shall  not  call  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  Pope,  either  privately  or  publicly,  or  pray 
for  him  as  such.  They  shall  not  presume  to  wrest  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  preach  the  words  and  deeds  of  Christ  sincerely 
and  simply,  according  to  the  meaning  of  Holy  Scriptures  and 
Catholic  doctors.  The  sermons  of  each  preacher  must  be 
carefully  examined,  and  burned  if  not  Catholic,  orthodox,  and 
worthy  of  a  Christian  preacher. 

Preachers  must  be  warned  to  commend  to  God  and  tlie 
prayers  of  the  people,  first  the  King  as  Head  of  the  Church 
of  England,  then  Queen  Anne  with  her  child,  and  lastly  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  with  the  other  Orders  of  the 
Clergy.  Each  house  must  be  obliged  to  show  their  gold, 
silver,  and  other  moveable  goods,  and  deliver  an  inventory  of 
them.  Each  house  must  take  an  oath,  under  their  convent 
seal,  to  observe  the  above  orders.^ 

To  confess  the  King  to  be  Supreme  Head  of  the  How  the 
Church  of  England  was  a  thing  that  friars  of  any  brought"" 
Order  had  never  done  yet ;  but  means  were  taken  to  u^der 
compel  them.     The  King,  wielding  powers  which  had 
hitherto  belonged  to  the  Pope,  first  appointed  the 
Prior  of  the  Austin   Friars  in   London  (Dr.  George 
Browne)  as  Provincial  of  the  whole  Order  of  Friars 
Hermits   in  England,  and  Dr.   John  Hilsey  as  Pro- 
vincial  of   the  whole   Order  of  the  Dominicans,   or 

1  L.  p.,  VI.  590,  from  MS.  Cott.,  Cleopatra  E  iv.  11. 


48    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION   bk.  m 

Friars  Preachers  ;  then  gave  these  two  jointly  a  com- 
mission to  visit  the  houses  of  all  Orders  of  friars 
whatever — not  only  their  own  two  Orders,  but  the 
Franciscans,  Carmelites,  and  Crossed  Friars — to  in- 
quire into  their  lives  and  morals  and  fealty  to  the 
King,  and  to  lay  down  injunctions  for  their  future 
conduct,  calling  in  the  secular  arm,  if  necessary, 
to  enforce  obedience.^  Of  course  Browne  and 
Hilsey  were  men  well  suited  to  serve  the  King's 
purpose,  or  they  would  not  have  been  selected ; 
and  each  of  them  had  his  reward  in  a  bishopric 
not  very  long  after.  The  lessons  of  compliance 
which  it  was  their  function  to  teach  were,  more- 
over, strongly  recommended  to  attention  by  the 
fact  that  two  Observant  Friars,  Rich  and  Risby, 
Wardens  of  the  houses  at  Richmond  and  Canterbury 
respectively,  had  been  hanged  at  Tyburn  in  April 
as  abettors  of  the  Nun  of  Kent.  Yet  the  efforts  of 
Browne  and  Hilsey  were  but  subsidiary  to  those  of 
other  agents  by  whom  it  was  hoped  to  bring  the 
friars,  especially  the  Observants,  into  complete  sub- 
jection. 

Those  worthy  associates.  Bishop  Roland  Lee  and 
Thomas  Bedyll,  little  more  than  a  fortnight  after 
the  execution  of  the  Nun's  adherents,  had  got  the 
prior,  convent,  and  novices  of  Sheen  to  take  the 
oath  required  by  the  statute,  and  had  done  their 
best  to  persuade  the  Observants  of  Richmond  to  do 
the  like.  With  these  they  confessed  that  after 
repeated  conferences  they  had  been  unsuccessful,  and 
had  despaired  of  influencing  them  till  the  7tli  May, 
when  they  passed  on  to  Sion.  It  was  just  three 
weeks  and  a  day  before  their  visit  to  the  London 
Charterhouse,  and  their  success  in  swearing  the  whole 
inmates  of  one  Carthusian  house  at  Sheen  encouraged 
them  to  look  for  further  conquests.  They  began 
to  think  that  the  Observants  of  Richmond  would  be 

1  L.  p.,  VI.  530,  587  (18). 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  49 

more  pliable,   and  meanwhile   they  would  see  what  Resistance 
they  could  do  with  the  brethren  and  sisters  of  Sion  obSrvants 
before  they  went  on  to  London.     They  were  not  sue-  ofRich- 
cessful,  and,  as  we  have  seen  already,  their  first  visit  °^°"^" 
to  the  London  Charterhouse  on  the  29th  May  had  to 
be  supplemented  by  a  second  visit  from  Bishop  Lee  in 
company  with   Sherifi"  Kitson   on  the  6th   June,   in 
order  to  produce  a  very  marked  efiect.      When  by 
these  means  the   qualified    oath  had  been   procured 
from  the  London  Carthusians,  Bishop  Lee  and  Bedyll 
were  directed  once  more  to  turn  their  attention  to  the 
Observants ;  but,  as  the  following  letter  shows,  their 
zeal  met  with  very  little  success. 

Bishop  Lee  and  Bedyll  to  Cromwell 

Please  it  you  to  understand  that  on  Saturday  last,  about 
6  of  the  clock,  we  received  your  letters  by  the  Provincial 
of  the  Augustine  Friars/  according  to  the  which  letters  we 
took  our  journey  forthwith  towards  Richmond,  and  came 
thither  betwixt  10  and  11  at  night.  And  in  the  morning 
following  we  had  first  communication  with  the  warden  and 
one  of  the  seniors  named  Sebastian,  and  after  with  the  whole 
convent,  and  moved  them  by  all  the  means  and  policies  that 
we  could  devise  to  consent  to  the  articles  delivered  unto  us 
by  the  said  Provincial,  and  required  the  confirmation  of  them 
by  their  convent  seal.  Which  warden  and  convent  showed 
themselves  very  untoward  in  that  behalf ;  and  thereupon  we 
were  forced  to  move  the  convent  to  put  the  matter  wholly 
in  the  arbitrament  of  their  seniors,  otherwise  named  dis- 
creets,  which  were  but  four  in  number,  and  that  they  four 
having  full  authority  to  consent  or  dissent  for  them  all 
and  in  the  name  of  them  all,  should  meet  us  at  Greenwich 
this  day  in  the  morning  and  bring  their  convent  seal  with 
them ;  and  so  they  did.  And  when  we  came  to  Greenwich 
we  exhorted  the  convent  likewise  to  put  the  whole  matter  in 
the  hands  of  their  seniors  or  discreets,  to  the  intent  to  avoid 
superfluous  words  and  idle  reasoning,  and  specially  to  the 
intent  that  if  the  discreets  should  refuse  to  consent,  it  were 
better,  after  our  minds,  to  strain  a  few  than  a  multitude. 

1  Dr.  George  Browne. 
VOL.  II  E 


50  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

But  at  Greenwich  we  could  in  no  wise  obtain  to  have  the 
matter  put  in  the  discreets'  hands  and  arbitrament,  but  the 
convent  stiffly  affirmed  that  where  the  matter  concerned 
particularly  every  one  of  their  souls,  they  would  answer 
particularly  every  man  for  himself.  And  when,  after  much 
reasoning  and  debating,  we  required  to  have  their  final  and 
determinate  answer,  which  we  demanded  of  every  one  of 
them  particularly,  we  found  them  in  one  mind  of  contradic- 
tion and  dissent  from  the  said  articles,  but  specially  against 
this  article.  Quod  episcopus  Bomanus  nihilo  majoris  neque 
auctoritatis  aut  jurisdictionis  hahendus  sit  quam  ccBteri  quivis 
episcopi  in  Anglia  vel  alibi  gentium  in  sua  quisque  diocesi. 

And  the  cause  of  their  dissent,  as  they  said,  was  by  reason 
that  that  article  was  clearly  against  their  profession  and  the 
rules  of  St.  Prancis,  in  which  rules  it  is  thus  written,  as  they 
showed  unto  us :  Ad  hcec  per  ohedientiam  injungo  ministris 
ut  petant  a  domino  Papa  unum  de  Sanctce  Romance  Ecclesice 
cardinalihus,  qui  sit  gubernaior,  protector,  et  corrector  istius 
fraternitatis,  ut  semper  subditi  et  subjecti  pedibus  Sanctce 
Ecclesice  ejusdem  stabiles  in  fide  Catholica  paupertatem  et 
humilitatem,  et  secundum  Evangelium  Domini  nostri  Jesu 
Christi,  quod  firmiter  promisimus  observemus.  Whereunto 
three  answers:  First,  that  St,  Francis  and  his  brethren  at 
the  beginning  were  dwelling  in  Italy  under  the  obedience  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  all  monks  not  exempt  be  under  the 
obedience  of  the  Bishop  of  Canterbury,  and  therefore  it  were 
no  marvel  that  St.  Francis  would  his  brethren  to  be  obedient 
to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  being  their  prelate ;  at  which  time  of 
St.  Francis,  and  long  after,  there  were  none  of  his  Order  in 
England,  and  therefore  these  words  were  not  meant  by  friars 
of  England.  The  second  answer  that  we  made  was  this,  that 
the  chapter  of  St.  Francis'  rule  which  they  allege  maketh 
mention  of  ministers,  and  that  they  should  desire  of  the 
Pope  to  have  one  of  the  cardinals  which  should  be  governor, 
protector,  and  corrector  of  their  brotherhood ;  and  we  showed 
them  that  in  our  opinion  that  chapter  [was]  no  part  of  St. 
Francis'  rule,  but  was  forged  sithence  and  planted  into  the 
same  by  some  ambitious  friar  of  that  Order,  for,  as  we  sup- 
posed, the  name  of  ministers  was  not  found  out  or  spoken  of 
when  their  rule  was  confirmed ;  and  it  is  [not  ?]  to  be  thought 
that  St.  Francis,  being  a  holy  man,  was  desirous  to  have  a 
cardinal  to  govern  and  correct  his  brethren.  Thirdly,  we 
affirmed  unto  them  that  they  were  the  King's  subjects  and 
that  by  the  law  of  God  they  owed  him  their  entire  obedi- 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  51 

ence;  and  that  the  Pope  and  St.  Francis  and  they  them- 
selves, with  their  vows,  oaths,  and  professions,  could  take 
away  not  one  jot  of  the  obedience  which  they  owe  to  the 
King  by  God's  law.  And  we  showed  them  that  none  of  the 
King's  subjects  could  submit  himself  or  bear  obedience  to 
any  other  prince  or  prelate,  without  the  King's  consent. 
And  if  he  did  he  did  the  King's  Grace  great  injury  and 
offended  God,  breaking  his  laws  commanding  obedience 
towards  princes.  And  in  this  behalf  we  showed  that  the 
King,  being  a  Christian  prince,  was  a  spiritual  man,  and 
that  obedience  which  they  owed  to  the  King  by  God's  law 
was  a  spiritual  obedience  and  in  spiritual  causes ;  for  they 
would  be  obedient  but  only  in  temporal  causes.  But  all 
this  reason  could  not  sink  into  their  obstinate  heads  and 
worn  in  custom  of  obedience  of  the  Pope, — albeit  we  further 
declared  unto  them  that  both  Archbishops  of  this  realm,  the 
Bishops  of  London,  Winchester,  Durham,  Bath,  and  all  other 
prelates  and  heads,  and  all  the  famous  clerks  of  this  realm, 
have  subscribed  to  this  conclusion  Quod  Bomanus  pontifex 
non  habet  majorem  jurisdictionem  ex  sacris  Uteris  in  hoe 
regno  Anglice  qucvm  quivis  alius  externus  episcopus.  All  this 
notwithstanding,  their  conclusion  was,  they  had  professed 
St.  Francis'  religion,  and  in  the  observance  thereof  they 
would  live  and  die.  Sorry  we  be  we  cannot  bring  them  to 
no  better  frame  and  order  in  this  behalf,  as  our  faithful 
minds  was  to  do,  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  King's 
pleasure.     From  the  Mile's  end,  the  15  th  day  of  June. 

By  yours  assuredly,  Eoland  Co.  et  Lich. 

Your  own,  Thomas  Bedyll. 
Addressed :  To  Master  Secretary.^ 


Since  reasoning  like  the  above  was  of  so  little  suppres- 
sion of  t] 
Observants. 


avail,  a  new  process  was  applied,  and,  two  days  later,  ^'^^  of  the 


two  carts  full  of  friars  passed  through  the  city  on 
their  way  to  the  Tower."  In  August  matters  were 
carried  a  step  or  two  further.  "  Of  seven  houses  of 
Observants,"  writes  Chapuys  on  the  11th,  "five  have 
been  already  emptied  of  friars  because  they  have  re- 
fused to  swear  to  the  statutes  made  against  the  Pope. 
Those  in  the  two  others  expect  also  to  be  expelled."  ^ 

^  MS.  Cott.,  Cleopatra  E  iv.  40.     Printed  by  Wright,  Suppression  of  the 
Monasteries,  pp.  41-44. 

2  L.  P.,  VII.  856.  ^  L.  P.,  VII.  1057. 


52  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

The  persecuted  brethren  found  means  to  send  a 
memorial  to  the  King ;  ^  but  of  course  it  was  alto- 
gether useless.  In  a  very  short  time  the  two  remain- 
ing houses  were  cleared,  and  their  inmates  distributed 
in  other  Franciscan  monasteries  of  the  Conventual, 
or  less  strict  Order,  where  they  were  kept  locked  in 
chains  and  worse  treated  than  they  would  have  been 
in  ordinary  prisons.^  Thus  the  whole  Order  of  the 
Observants  in  England  was  suppressed. 

All  this,  be  it  observed,  was  before  the  tyrannical 
view  of  Supremacy  had  even  been  endorsed  by 
Parliament ;  for  the  session  in  which  the  Act  of 
Supreme  Head  was  passed  only  began  in  November 
following,  and,  as  we  have  seen.  Parliament  showed 
itself  anxious  to  protect  those  who  did  not  offend 
"  maliciously."  But  together  with  this  came  Acts  of 
Attainder  against  More  and  Fisher  for  refusing  the 
oath  to  the  succession  (which  they  did  only  on 
account  of  its  preamble),  and  the  severe  Act  of 
treasons  already  mentioned,  enacted  to  prevent 
speaking  against  the  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn. 
It  was  in  the  following  year,  1535,  that  all  this 
fearful  legislation  began  to  bear  fruit,  and  the  world 
was  horror-struck  at  the  executions  of  England's  best 
and  noblest  sons.  But  after  More's  head  had  fallen 
on  Tower  Hill  in  July  legal  butcheries  ceased  for 
a  while.  The  government  even  of  the  Church  in 
England  was  now  a  despotism  against  which  it  was 
hopeless  to  contend ;  and  the  foundations  had  to  be 
laid  for  a  new  order  of  things  without  much  risk  of 
interference  from  abroad. 

It  was  in  truth  a  new  order  of  things  even  from 
the  passing  of  that  Act  of  Supremacy ;  for  never 
had  such  pretensions  been  advanced  before  by  any 
English  sovereign,  or  in  any  English  sovereign's 
name.     But  the  development  of  that  new  order  was 

^  L.  p.,  VII.  1063. 
2  L.  p.,  VII.  1095.     Cp.  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  25. 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  53 

not  a  matter  that  could  be  left  to  time  and  circum- 
stance. The  beginning  of  the  year  1535  had  seen 
Cromwell  appointed  Vicegerent  of  the  King  in 
spiritual  matters,  to  carry  out  a  policy  within  the 
Church  as  well  as  within  the  State,  of  which  he 
seems  himself  to  have  been  the  great  deviser.  Bent 
merely  on  satisfying  a  despotic  master  with  a  view  to 
his  own  advancement  in  wealth  and  power,  he  never 
allowed  considerations  of  humanity  or  justice  to  stand 
for  a  moment  in  his  way.  In  January  he  received 
a  commission  for  a  general  visitation  of  churches, 
monasteries,  and  clergy  throughout  the  kingdom  ; 
but  nothing  was  done  in  the  matter  during  the  first 
half  of  the  year  while  those  awful  executions  were 
going  on.  In  July,  however,  while  he  was  with  Cromweii 
the  King  in  the  West  of  England,  the  two  monastic  vS?s\or 
Visitors  whom  he  had  appointed,  Dr.  Legh  and  Dr.  the  monas- 
Layton,  started  on  their  work.  They  had  both,  as  *®™^* 
Layton  confessed,  been  preferred  to  the  King's  ser- 
vice by  Cromwell  and  looked  upon  him  as  their  only 
patron  ;  and  in  the  North  Country  they  had  both  of 
them  "  familiar  acquaintance,"  within  ten  or  twelve 
miles  of  every  monastery,  by  whom  they  could  find 
out  every  scandal,  "  so  that  no  knavery  could  be  hid 
from  them."  ^ 

They  had  both,  moreover,  shown  their  fitness  for 
the  work  required  by  taking  part  in  the  examinations 
of  More  and  Fisher  in  the  Tower ;  and  so  had  John 
Ap  Rice,  a  notary,  who  was  set  to  accompany  Dr.  Legh 
upon  his  travels.  The  three  worthies  did  not  agree 
very  well  together  at  first.  Dr.  Legh  visited  over 
again  the  monastery  of  Bruton  which  had  already 
been  visited  by  Layton,  and  complained  that  Layton 
had  not  been  strict  enough  elsewhere,  in  restraining 
the  heads  and  brethren  from  leaving  the  precincts. 
Complaints  on  the  other  hand  reached  Cromwell  of 
Legh's  ostentatious  insolence,  which  he  blamed  Ap 

^  L.  p.,  VIII.  822. 


54  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Rice  for  not  reporting.  Ap  Rice  agreed  that  Legh 
was  too  insolent  and  pompous,  but  he  thought  Crom- 
well had  seen  evidence  of  the  fact  himself  in  London. 
"  Wherever  he  comes,"  wrote  Ap  Rice,  "  he  handles 
the  fathers  very  roughly,  many  times  for  small 
causes,  as  for  not  meeting  him  at  the  door,  where 
they  had  warning  of  his  coming."  He  was  young 
and  intolerably  conceited,  and,  moreover,  took  ex- 
orbitant fees  of  the  houses  he  visited ;  while  at  every 
election  he  demanded  the  altogether  unheard-of  sum 
of  £20.  He  made  all  the  monks  afraid  of  him  ;  and 
he  departed  in  some  matters  from  the  instructions 
given  him  in  his  dealings  with  them.  Still  it  would 
not  do  for  Cromwell  to  punish  him  and  so  discredit 
the  wisdom  of  his  own  appointment ;  it  would  be 
better,  Ap  Rice  thought,  first  to  admonish  him 
gently.' 

Ap  Rice,  indeed,  as  he  confessed,  had  some  per- 
sonal reasons  of  his  own  for  this  suggestion.  Legh 
had  acquaintance  with  so  many  rufflers  and  serving- 
men  that  he  could  make  him  very  uncomfortable  if 
he  suspected  that  he  was  giving  information  against 
him.  But  as  to  the  taking  of  fees,  Legh,  no  doubt, 
had  learned  much  of  the  arts  used  by  Cromwell  him- 
self when  he  suppressed  the  small  monasteries  for 
Wolsey's  colleges.  Moreover,  if  his  strictness  was 
complained  of,  Legh  had  a  good  deal  to  say  for  him- 
self. Ap  Rice,  it  seems,  thought  it  was  excessive 
that  not  even  the  heads  of  monastic  houses  were 
allowed  to  go  out  of  doors.  Many  of  those  houses, 
he  remarked,  were  supported  by  husbandry,  and 
would  be  quite  unable  to  live  if  their  heads  were 
never  to  leave  their  precincts.  The  head  of  a  house 
was  chosen  expressly  for  his  ability  in  business  matters, 
and  was  to  do  duty  in  providing  for  all  the  rest  that 
they  might  be  released  from  secular  cares  and  devote 
their   attention    the   more   freely   to   their   religious 

'  L.  P.,  IX.  138,  139,  167,  621,  622,  630. 


CH.  II       SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  55 

duties.  Even  the  monks  of  the  Charterhouse  re-  , 
quired  to  have  a  proctor,  and  their  prior  had  to  go 
abroad  on  the  business  of  the  house.^  But  Legh 
considered  that  he  was  not  bound  to  take  such 
matters  into  consideration.  He  merely  followed  his 
instructions,  treating  heads  and  members  alike,  which 
would  have  a  most  beneficial  effect  in  making  them 
feel  the  King's  ecclesiastical  power,  and  apply 
either  to  the  King  himself  or  to  Cromwell  for  relief. 
Even  when  his  instructions  were  modified  by  Crom- 
well, who  wrote  to  allow  him  at  discretion  to  let  the 
heads  go  abroad  quietly  on  the  business  of  their 
houses,  he  declined  to  relax  his  orders  till  he  had 
spoken  with  Cromwell  himself,  thinking  not  only 
that  it  might  give  occasion  to  the  juniors  to  com- 
plain of  unequal  treatment,  but  that  it  would  be  for 
Cromwell's  own  advantage  to  compel  the  seniors  thus 
to  seek  his  favour  and  the  King's.^ 

By  and  by  Legh  and  Ap  Kice  ventured  to  submit 
their  joint  counsel  to  Cromwell  on  a  higher  subject. 
The  visitation  of  monasteries  was  but  one  depart- 
ment of  the  Vicegerent's  functions,  and  it  could  not 
be  effectually  carried  on  without  encroachment  on 
the  regular  functions  of  the  bishops.  On  the  18th 
September  royal  letters  were  despatched  to  the  two 
archbishops  to  inhibit  their  suffragans  from  visiting  Episcopal 
their  dioceses,  as  the  King  intended  a  general  visita-  J^Qhibitedf 
tion  of  the  whole  kingdom.  Even  Cranmer  did  not 
at  once  act  upon  this  mandate.  Probably  he  made 
some  remonstrances,  the  bishops  themselves  very 
naturally  being  much  disturbed  at  the  idea  that  their 
functions  were  to  be  suspended ;  and  it  was  only  on 
the  2nd  October  that  he  sent  the  required  inhibi- 
tion to  the  Bishop  of  London.^  It  was  Legh  and 
Ap  Rice  who  had  drawn  up  the  inhibitions,  and, 
anticipating  the  remonstrances  of  the  bishops,  they 
wrote  to  Cromwell  on  the  24th  September  giving  six 

^  L.  p.,  IX.  139.  "'  L.  p.,  IX.  265.  ^  i_  p,^  j^.  517. 


56    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

reasons  in  justification  of  the  step.  1st,  As  the 
King  was  now  acknowledged  as  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  of  England  (though  he  had  always  been  so), 
the  only  way  to  give  effect  to  his  title  was  by  taking 
all  jurisdiction  into  his  own  hands  for  a  season.  2nd, 
If  this  were  not  done  the  bishops  would  imagine 
they  had  not  received  their  jurisdiction  from  the  King, 
3rd,  They  must  either  have  it  by  the  law  of  God,  or 
from  "  the  Bishop  of  Kome,"  or  from  the  King.  If 
the  first,  let  them  show  it  by  Scripture,  which  they 
would  hardly  be  so  unwise  as  to  attempt.  If  the 
second,  let  them  exercise  it  still  if  they  thought  meet. 
If  the  third,  why  object  to  its  resumption  by  the  King  ? 
4th,  They  might  say  they  had  "  prescribed  against 
the  King  " — that  is  to  say,  they  might  urge  the  plea 
of  prescription  ;  which,  no  doubt,  they  would,  though 
the  law  was  against  them,  and  for  that  very  reason  it 
was  well  to  interrupt  their  visitation.  5th,  If  they 
exercised  their  jurisdiction,  it  would  undoubtedly  be 
according  to  the  canon  law,  which  was  now  abrogated 
in  England ;  so  Lee  and  Ap  Rice  considered  that 
the  jurisdiction  should  be  given  them  from  the  King 
with  the  laws  for  executing  it.  6th,  When  they 
challenged  jurisdiction  as  theirs  by  right,  it  was  clear 
that  they  would  refer  it  to  some  one  else  than  the 
King  if  they  only  dared.^ 

The  very  tenor  of  these  arguments  shows  the 
greatness  of  the  revolution  which  two  upstarts — mere 
creatures  of  Cromwell — had  taken  upon  them  to  urge 
on  a  not  unwilling  master.  Not  a  vestige  of  authority 
was  to  be  left  to  the  bishops  which  was  not  avowedly 
derived  from  the  King  as  the  only  source.  The  whole 
form  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  was  to  be  changed, 
and  the  bishops  must  submit  to  an  innovation  which 
sensibly  lowered  their  dignity  and  repute  among 
the  people.  Suggestions  were  made  about  the  same 
time  by  other  councillors  for  bringing  ecclesiastical 

^  L.  p.,  IX.  424. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  57 

causes  under  the  cognisance  of  temporal  judges.^ 
The  way,  at  all  events,  was  clear  for  Legh,  Ap 
Rice,  and  Layton  to  visit  the  monasteries  at  their 
pleasure. 

Their  commission,  at  first,  does  not  seem  to  have 
extended  to  the  Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge, 
though  the  colleges  might  have  been  considered  in 
that  day  somewhat  in  the  light  of  monastic  bodies. 
Leojh  wrote  to  Cromwell  from  Wilton  on  the  3rd 
September  urging  him  to  consider  well  whom  he  sent 
to  those  universities,  "  where  either  would  be  found 
all  virtue  and  goodness  or  else  the  fountain  of  all 
vice  and  mischief."  ^  The  person  Cromwell  actually 
sent  to  visit  Oxford,  however,  was  Layton,  who  must  Layton 
have  arrived  there  about  a  week  after  Legh  wrote  ^Igit^^e^ 
this  letter  from  Wilton ;  and  Legh  himself  writes  univer- 
from  Cambridge  on  the  21st  October.^  So  the  two  ^i"««^^«°- 
universities  were  successively  subjected  to  the  dis- 
cipline of  the  two  chief  monastic  Visitors  ;  and  in  this 
new  field,  as  in  the  former,  Layton  was  at  work  before 
his  colleague,  armed  with  full  authority  to  bring  about 
a  new  state  of  things.  In  this  business,  indeed,  he 
seems  to  have  had  colleagues,  though  we  do  not  know 
their  names,  for  in  the  report  of  their  joint  doings  to 
Cromwell  he  uses  continually  the  plural  pronoun 
"  we."  But  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  he  himself  was 
the  chief  moving  spirit,  and  his  account  of  what  was 
done  is  lively  reading.  In  Magdalen  College  where 
they  found  one  lecture  of  divinity,  two  of  philosophy 
(moral  and  natural),  and  one  of  Latin,  they  added  a 
lecture  in  Greek.  In  New  College  they  established 
one  Greek  and  one  Latin  lecture,  and  the  like  at  All 
Souls,  but  they  found  Corpus  Christi  was  so  provided 
already.  They  established  a  Latin  lecture  at  Merton 
and  another  at  Queen's.  The  revenues  of  the  other 
Colleges  were  insuflScient  to  support  such  lectures,  and 

^  L.  P.,  IX.  119.  ^  Wright's  Suppression,  p.  Q&. 

3  L.P.,  IX.  350,  651. 


58    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

their  students  were  enjoined  under  a  penalty  to  resort 
daily  to  the  lectures  thus  established. 

So  far  the  Visitors  had  provided  for  the  future 
study  of  Latin  and  Greek,  and  of  moral  and  natural 
philosophy.  But  the  real  revolution  was  in  the 
abolition  of  the  study  of  the  canon  law  and  scholastic 
theology.  "We  have  set  Duns  in  Bocardo,"  Layton 
continues,  "  and  have  utterly  banished  him  Oxford 
forever  with  all  his  blind  glosses,"  adding  that  he 
was  now  nailed  up  upon  posts  for  public  use  "  in  all 
common  houses  of  easement."  "  And  the  second  time 
we  came  to  New  College,  after  we  had  declared  your 
injunctions,  we  found  all  the  great  quadrant  court 
full  of  the  leaves  of  Duns,  the  wind  blowing  them 
into  every  corner.  And  there  we  found  one  Mr. 
Greenfield,  a  gentleman  of  Buckinghamshire,  gathering 
up  part  of  the  said  book  leaves,  as  he  said,  therewith 
to  make  him  sewelles  or  '  blawnsherres '  ^  to  keep 
the  deer  within  the  wood,  thereby  to  have  the  '  better 
cry  with  his  hounds.'  "  In  place  of  a  canon  law  lecture 
the  Visitors  instituted  one  on  civil  law  to  be  read  in 
every  college,  hall,  and  inn.  To  complete  their  great 
reform  they  imposed  new  regulations  on  students  sent 
up  from  the  monasteries,  prohibiting  their  resort  to 
taverns  or  alehouses,  and  laundresses  from  visiting 
their  chambers  —  to  the  great  distress,  as  Layton 
understood,  "  of  all  the  double  honest  women  of  the 
town."  =^ 

Legh's  injunctions  for  Cambridge  ^  are  less  interest- 
ing than  Layton's  account  of  his  own  at  Oxford.  The 
University,  he  himself  said,  approved  them  highly 
"  except  three  or  four  Pharisaical  Pharisees."  *  The 
injunctions  were  in  Cromwell's  name,  who  had  just 

^  The  meaning  of  these  terms  is  pretty  well  conveyed  by  the  words  which 
follow,  A  "sewell"  was  a  figure  with  papers  fluttering  in  the  wind  like  a 
scarecrow  to  frighten  deer.  A  "  blancher  "  was  either  a  man  or  any  inanimate 
device  to  serve  the  same  purpose. 

-  Wright's  Suppressicm  of  the  Mcmasteries,  pp.  70-72. 

3  L.  r.,  IX.  664.  *  L.  P.,  IX.  694. 


tions  given 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  59 

been  made  Chancellor  of  the  University  in  place  of 
the  martyred  Fisher,  and  we  may  place  what  value 
we  please  on  Legh's  assurance  in  writing  to  him  : 
*'  They  say  you  have  done  more  for  the  advancement 
of  learning  than  ever  Chancellor  did."  ^ 

As  to  the  general  character  of  the  monastic  visita- 
tion, it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  much  ;  for  though 
the  amount  of  monastic  impurity  may  be  a  subject  of 
debate,  it  is  now  generally  agreed  that  it  was  not  an 
honest  investigation.  But  a  few  specific  illustrations 
may  not  be  out  of  place.  The  nature  of  the  commis-  instruc- 
sion  given  to  the  Visitors  is  briefly  described  by  Abbot  Jir'^thf 
Gasquet  as  follows  : —  monastic 

■"■  visitation. 

They  were  furnished  with  a  set  of  eighty-six  articles  of 
inquiry  and  with  twenty-five  injunctions,  to  which  they  had 
power  to  add  much  at  their  discretion.  The  articles  of  inquiry 
were  searching,  the  injunctions  minute  and  exacting.  Framed 
in  the  spirit  of  three  centuries  earlier,  unworkable  in  practice, 
and  enforced  by  such  agents,  it  is  easy  to  understand,  even 
were  there  no  written  evidence  of  the  fact,  that  they  were 
galling  and  unbearable  to  the  helpless  inmates  of  the 
monasteries.  We  may  give  a  passing  notice  to  one  or  two  of 
these  regulations,  as  they  show  the  spirit  which  actuated 
those  who  framed  them.  All  religious  under  twenty-four 
years  of  age,  or  who  had  been  professed  under  twenty,  were 
to  be  dismissed  from  the  religious  life.  Those  who  were  left 
became  practically  prisoners  in  their  monasteries.  No  one 
was  allowed  to  leave  the  precincts  (which  even  in  the  larger 
monasteries  were  very  confined  as  to  limit)  or  to  visit  there. 
In  many  instances  porters,  who  were  in  reality  gaolers,  were 
appointed  to  see  that  this  impossible  regulation  was  kept. 
What  was  simply  destructive  of  all  discipline  and  order  in 
the  monasteries  was  an  injunction  that  every  religious  who 
wished  to  complain  of  anything  done  by  his  superior  or  any 
of  his  brethren  was  to  have  a  right  at  any  time  to  appeal  to 
Cromwell.  To  facilitate  this  the  superior  was  ordered  to  find 
any  subject  the  money  and  means  for  prosecuting  such  an 
appeal  in  person,  if  he  so  desired.^ 

1  L.P.,  IX.  708. 
^  Gasq^uet's  Henry  VIII.  avd  the  English  Monasteries,  i.  255-6. 


6o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk. 


Examples 
how  it 
destroyed 
discipline 
— at  Wor- 
cester ; 


The  results  of  all  this  interference  appear  naturally 
in  Cromwell's  correspondence,  and,  considering  how 
completely  that  correspondence  seems  to  have  been 
preserved,  we  are  almost  surprised  that  the  evidences 
of  demoralisation  procured  were  not  greater.  Many, 
doubtless,  were  the  houses  in  which  the  monks  were 
still  loyal  to  their  superiors,  and  good  discipline 
was  still  kept  up  in  spite  of  the  insidious  efforts  of 
Cromwell  and  the  Visitors  to  destroy  it.  But  as  to 
the  demoralisation  we  must  not  leave  the  reader  to 
general  inferences  without  positive  examples. 

At  Worcester,  William  Fordham  had  occupied  seven 
years  before  the  office  of  cellarer  to  the  Cathedral 
Priory.  He  incurred  debts  in  the  name  of  the 
monastery  to  the  extent  of  £280,  and  borrowed 
money,  likewise  in  the  name  of  the  monastery,  which 
he  converted  to  his  own  use,  while  the  prior,  attending 
the  Convocation  in  London,  was  arrested  for  payment 
of  his  bills.  He  also  incurred  a  disease  which  speaks 
ill  for  the  kind  of  life  he  led,  and  the  house  was 
charged  with  payments  for  his  cure.  Under  these 
circumstances  it  is  not  wonderful  that  he  was  removed 
from  his  post  and  a  new  cellarer  appointed.  But 
the  priory  was  visited  by  Legh  and  Ap  Rice  in 
the  end  of  July,  and  on  the  1st  August  Fordham 
wrote  to  Cromwell  commending  the  pains  taken  by 
his  Visitors,  trusting  that  they  would  report  that  he 
had  lived  religiously,  and  declaring  that  "  the  saddest 
men  "  of  the  monastery  wished  him  restored  to  his 
office.  In  his  time,  he  said,  no  lawsuits  had  gone 
against  the  house,  but  during  the  seven  years  since 
his  removal  they  had  lost  £200.  His  final  plea  to 
Cromwell,  however,  was  undoubtedly  the  most 
effective.  "  If  your  Lordship  will  restore  me " 
(Cromwell,  however,  was  not  a  lord  at  that  time)  "  I 
will  give  you  100  marks."  Four  weeks  later  he  was 
given  to  understand  that  Cromwell  had  "  spoken  good 
words  of  him,"  and  that  his  suit  was  successful.     He 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  6i 

accordingly  writes  to  Cromwell  to  express  his  thanks, 
and  as  he  hears  that  "some  of  the  brethren"  were 
applying  to  men  of  honour  to  speak  for  them,  he 
himself  will  rely  entirely  upon  Cromwell,  whose 
administration,  he  says,  was  so  much  to  the  comfort 
of  the  King,  the  Queen,  and  all  their  subjects.  In 
this  reign,  he  ventured  to  say,  no  man  had  suffered 
but  he  had  confessed  himself  he  had  deserved  to 
suffer,  and  many  who  had  suffered  might  have  lived 
if  they  would  under  such  a  benignant  King.  "  His 
most  merciful  pardon  was  ready ;  it  was  but  their 
own  folly.     All  this  realm  may  it  well  know."  ^ 

The  reader  will  hardly  require  any  criterion  besides 
his  own  words  by  which  to  judge  the  sycophant.  He 
was  answered  by  a  letter  from  the  convent  to  Crom- 
well, signed  by  the  sub-prior  (the  prior,  William 
More,  had  got  into  trouble,  as  we  shall  see)  and  six- 
and-twenty  of  the  monks,  giving  the  reasons  why  he 
was  dismissed  from  the  cellarership,  which,  one  would 
think,  were  sufficiently  weighty.  But  it  is  true,  as 
Fordham  himself  wrote,  that  he  had  supporters  within 
the  monastery,  whether  "  the  saddest  men "  of  the 
community  may  perhaps  be  open  to  question.  Legh 
in  his  visitation  of  course  had  his  ears  open  to 
complaints,  and  ordered  the  prior,  with  three  of  his 
brethren,  to  appear  before  Cromwell  in  the  beginning 
of  August.  Cromwell  was  at  that  time  in  the  West 
Country,  with  the  King,  and  even  when  he  got 
home  in  October  the  prior  remained  in  custody  at 
Gloucester." 

It  would  seem  that  in  spring  the  prior  had  im- 
prisoned a  refractory  monk  named  John  Musard  for 
appealing  to  Cranmer's  visitation.  Musard  could 
not  have  been  detained  very  long ;  for  in  July,  when 
the  King  was  at  Gloucester,  and  his  Vicegerent, 
Cromwell,  at  Winchcombe,  he  took  the  opportunity 
of  visiting  them  both  and  reporting  the  treasonable 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  6,  204,  653.  2  2;.  p.,  ix.  656. 


62    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

conversation  of  some  of  the  monks  who  had  railed  at 
the  King  and  Queen  Anne  and  upheld  the  authority 
of  the  Pope.  For  this,  however,  he  complains  that 
his  "  unkind  master,"  and  some  of  the  brethren, 
"  conspired  against  him,"  and  made  such  a  report  of 
him  to  Cromwell  that  he  was  again  imprisoned  at 
Worcester,  this  time  by  Cromwell's  orders.  Even 
Legh  and  Ap  Rice  joined  in  accusing  him ;  and 
as,  apparently,  Cromwell  had  acted  on  their  informa- 
tion, he  wrote  to  Cromwell  himself  for  a  further 
hearing.  He  wrote  also  to  the  King,  showing  that 
his  father  and  brothers  had  devoted  themselves  to  the 
service  of  Henry  VH.,  who  made  two  of  them 
Yeomen  of  the  Crown,  and  one  had  been  slain  at  the 
siege  of  Boulogne ;  and  he  further  intimated  that 
sixteen  of  his  near  relations  were  ready  any  day  to 
set  upon  four-and-twenty  of  his  Grace's  evil  willers.^ 
At  the  election  of  Latimer  as  bishop  he  could  take 
no  part,  having  been  expelled  by  the  Chancellor  as 
an  excommunicate,  and  he  wrote  to  Cromwell  that 
another  of  the  monks  deserved  such  treatment  better, 
— Thomas  Blockley,  who  stole  out  of  his  cell  a  letter 
conveying  an  accusation  of  treason.  Dr.  Legh,  he 
said,  had  stated  openly  that  Blockley  was  "  com- 
perted  "  by  many  of  the  convent  for  incontinency 
and  as  a  sower  of  discord  among  them,  yet  nothing 
had  been  laid  to  his  charge,  and  it  was  suspected  that 
he  had  bribed  Dr.  Legh  and  Master  Ap  Rice.^  Such 
was  the  imputation  he  did  not  scruple  to  make  against 
Cromwell's  Visitors,  and  it  certainly  was  not  incon- 
ceivable. 

With  all  this  he  was  unable  to  win  favour,  and 
remained  still  in  prison  in  January  following,  writing 
new  representations  to  Cromwell  of  the  maladminis- 
tration of  the  monastery  under  the  prior  and  his  last 
predecessor.^     But  he   had  succeeded  in  getting  his 

1  L.  P.,  IX.  51,  52,  108.  2  I  p,^  IX.  497. 

3  i.  P.,  X.  216. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  63 

prior  into  trouble  for  treason,  and  the  Lord  Chancellor 
sent  down  a  Commission  of  oyer  and  terminer  to  in- 
vestigate the  case.^  The  prior  remained  for  some  time 
in  custody.^  The  King  himself,  however,  manifested 
some  disposition  to  restore  him  to  his  office,  and 
on  this  subject  Cromwell  asked  the  opinion  of 
Latimer  as  his  bishop,  who,  however,  gave  it  as  his 
opinion  that  if  "  that  great  crime "  was  proved 
against  him,  it  was  a  pity  even  to  spare  his  life.^ 
Nothing,  apparently,  could  atone  in  Latimer's  eyes 
for  the  fact  of  a  man  having  countenanced  the  Pope's 
authority  against  the  King's.  The  King  himself, 
however,  was  more  merciful  in  this  case  than 
Latimer,  and  was  content  to  accept  the  man's 
resignation,  and  to  give  him  a  pension,  and,  it  would 
seem,  a  comfortable  living  besides/ 

The  prior's  chief  accuser  was  Dr.  Roger  Neckham, 
whom  he  had  deposed  from  the  office  of  sub-prior.^ 
In  pleading  to  Cromwell  that  the  prior's  case  might 
be  carefully  examined.  Lady  Margery  Sandys  declared 
that  he  was  a  true  monk  to  God  and  the  King,  and 
also  that  his  accuser,  Neckham,  was  sufficiently  well 
known.^  The  prior  had  been  elected  by  the  unani- 
mous vote  of  the  convent,  and  had  received  his 
appointment  from  Fox,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  with- 
out giving  a  penny  for  his  promotion.  Nevertheless 
he  knew  well  enough  the  altered  ways  of  the  world, 
and,  as  Lady  Margery  wrote,  was  prepared  to  give 
Cromwell  in  ready  money  as  much  as  any  other  man. 
It  would  have  been  useless  interceding  for  him 
without  such  an  intimation.  Of  course  Musard  and 
Neckham  were  strong  supporters  of  the  dismissed 
cellarer  Fordham. 

Now  let  us  look  at  the  effects  of  the  visitation  on  at  wmch- 
another  large  West  Country  monastery.     At  Winch-  ^^^^^ ' 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  90  (p.  26),  151,  165.  "^  L.  P. ,  ix.  304. 

3  L.  P.,  X.  56.  *  L.  P.,  X.  311,  597  (8),  1272  ;  xvii.  14. 

^  L.  P.,  IX.  52  (2).  ^  L.  P.,  IX.  656. 


64  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

combe  was  a  monk  named  John  Horwood,  who 
generally  used  the  signature  of  "  Placet,"  or  "  Pla- 
cidus."  On  the  20th  August  he  begins  a  corre- 
spondence with  Cromwell  by  informing  him  that  the 
monastery  had  lately  been  visited  by  the  King's 
Commissioners,  to  whom  he  felt  bound  in  conscience 
to  report  some  things, — especially  about  a  certain 
book  which  he  was  ready  to  send  to  Cromwell,  and 
which  one  Master  Cannonis,  dwelling  near  Salisbury, 
had  borrowed  of  him  long  ago.  But  he  also  desired 
counsel  what  to  do  about  certain  ceremonies  for  exalt- 
ing "  the  Bishop  of  Rome."  Encouraged  by  the 
Visitors,  he  asked  Cromwell  for  orders  to  bring  in 
books  touching  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome's "  authority, 
St.  Patrick's  Purgatory,  miracles,  and  so  forth,  by 
which  simple  souls  were  confounded.^  In  another 
letter  he  asks  for  authority  to  seize  any  books  about 
Purgatory,  and  mentions  particularly  one,  "  freshly 
limned  and  fair  written,"  of  which  the  matter  is  but 
"  dry  dreams  "  ;  also  a  book  of  Alverius,  in  which  the 
power  of  the  Pope  is  so  magnified  that  he  was  made 
equal  to  the  Holy  Trinity.  He  advises  that  his 
brother,  Overbury,  should  be  commanded  to  preach 
the  Royal  Supremacy  every  Sunday  before  the  con- 
vent, and  have  his  chamber,  books,  and  fire ;  and 
that  he  himself  should  have  authority  to  compel 
every  monk  to  preach  it  and  to  teach  it  to  others.^ 
This  was  pretty  well  for  a  subordinate.  One  asks  in 
amazement,  if  his  request  was  granted,  what  amount 
of  authority  was  left  to  his  abbot.  Clearly,  none 
at  all. 

No  wonder  that  in  his  next  letter,  dated  9th 
September,  he  declares  that  his  proceedings  are  dis- 
liked by  the  convent.  He  was  counted  a  wretch,  he 
said,  because  he  had  made  a  little  treatise  against 
the  usurped  power  of  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome."  His 
brethren,  it  seems,  attached  far  too  great  importance 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  134.  "^  L.  p.,  IX.  135. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  65 

to  their  three  vows,  "  the  efficacy  "  of  which  Cromwell 
had  "  discreetly  declared  "  to  them  when  he  was  with 
them.^  But,  however  unpopular  they  made  him  in 
the  convent,  his  eflforts  to  please  Cromwell  had  gained 
some  personal  comforts  for  himself,  for  Cromwell  had 
ordered  that  he  should  be  excused  from  rising  at  mid- 
night. This  had  created  all  the  more  grudge  against 
him ;  yet  his  much-enduring  abbot,  who  was  obliged 
to  tell  him  so,  was,  he  said,  very  good  to  him.  The 
abbot  knew  very  well  that  he  could  not  endure  the 
rigour  of  the  religion,  the  fasts,  the  "  frayter,"  and 
other  observances.  He  begs  Cromwell,  therefore,  to 
get  him  a  capacity  to  take  a  benefice  without  changing 
his  habit.  Bishop  Roland  Lee  could  have  got  him 
one  at  one  time,  but  he  trusted  to  the  favour  of 
Cromwell  and  his  abbot,  who  had  already  allowed 
him  the  cure  of  a  little  village  of  forty  souls,  though 
not  worth  quite  £4  a  year.  "  Such  a  thing,"  he 
wrote,  "  were  most  quiet  for  me,  which  I  may  serve 
and  keep  my  bed  and  board,  and  go  to  my  book  in 
the  monastery."  ^ 

He  got  leave  to  visit  Cromwell  in  September  when 
he  was  in  attendance  on  the  King  at  Waltham,  and 
apparently  obtained  a  commission  about  books  such 
as  he  desired,  or  nearly  so.  He  was  evidently  greatly 
indebted  in  these  matters  to  Dr.  Lay  ton.  ' '  You 
cannot  love  your  servant  Dr.  Layton  too  well,"  he 
writes  to  Cromwell,  and  he  goes  on  to  tell  how  he  was 
proceeding  with  his  commission.  "  I  have  sought 
many  old  books  and  ragged  pamphlets  de  Purga- 
torio,  'pro  et  contra."  He  had  also  found  a  letter 
to  Pope  John  against  pride  and  covetousness.  He 
had  scribbled  in  haste  a  small  quire  against  prayers 
for  the  dead,  and  some  other  points.  He  had  got 
hold  of  a  book  of  Alverius,  de  Planctu  Ecclesice, 
"  which  some  thought  smelt  of  the  Popish  pannier," 
and  so  forth. ^ 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  321.  ^  L.  P.,  IX.  322.  ^  L.  P.,  ix.  723. 

VOL.  II  F 


66    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

There  are  also  two  letters  to  Cromwell  from  his 
"  brother  Overbury,"  above  mentioned,  for  whom  he 
desired  powers  to  assist  him  in  forcing  the  Royal 
Supremacy  upon  the  convent.  These  are  written  in  a 
hand  so  exactly  like  his  own  that  it  is  really  very 
difficult  to  distinguish  between  them.^  It  may  be 
desirable  to  give  the  text  of  these  letters  in  full : — 

William  Overbury  to  Cromwell — I 

Jesus  Christus. 

Honorable  Master  Secretary,  I  meekly  commend  me  unto 
your  goodness,  as  the  true  subject  ought  to  the  power  which 
is  ordained  of  Almighty  God.  For  to  you  is  given  ministra- 
tion of  God  next  under  the  King's  Highness ;  to  the  which 
power  of  ministration  every  Christian  man  in  this  realm  of 
England  ought  truly  without  any  feigning  meekly  to  obey, 
and  not  for  fear  but  for  safeguard  of  conscience.  And  for 
my  poor  part,  because  I  would  knowledge  myself  in  heart, 
word  and  deed  to  be  a  true  obediencer  and  faithful  subject 
to  this  high  power  which  is  given  to  the  King's  Grace 
immediately  next  to  God,  as  excelling  and  forepassing  all 
other,  and  to  you  as  the  faithful  minister  under  him :  Where- 
fore by  God's  own  words  you  and  all  such  true  ministers  that 
truly  doen  minister  under  this  power  (which  was  not  given 
by  any  man's  trade  or  invention,  but  only  by  God)  be  called 
well-doers.  There  is  no  power  but  only  of  God,  who  ever 
preserve  you.  Scribbled  in  great  haste,  the  16th  day  of 
September. 

By  your  obiencer, 

William  Overbury. 

Addressed: — "To  the  very  honorable  Master  Secretary 
unto  the  King's  Highness,  with  reverence  this  be  delivered."  ^ 

^  Perhaps  he  really  wrote  with  his  own  hand  in  Overbury's  name,  although 
both  signed  the  Supremacy,  or  appear  to  have  done  so.  He  was  certainly 
obliging  enough  to  write  a  letter  to  Cromwell  in  the  name  of  one  John 
Persons,  who  appears  to  have  been  a  servant  or  dependant  on  the  abbey, 
complaining  of  the  abbot  for  not  allowing  him  to  be  in  the  town  of 
Winchcombe  to  work  for  his  living.  The  only  cause  of  complaint  the 
abbot  had  against  him,  Persons  writes — that  is  to  say,  Placidus  writes  for 
him — was  that  he  waited  on  one  of  the  monks  (of  course  Placidus  himself)  to 
London,  when  he  was  commanded  by  Cromwell  to  bring  up  certain  books  to 
him  (L.  P.,  IX.  1137).  The  handwriting  of  this  letter  is  undoubtedly  that 
of  Placidus  himself.  ^  j^  p^^  jx.  331. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  67 

This  letter  is  written  in  a  beautiful  regular  hand, 
which  is  quite  exceptional  in  its  neatness,  and  no  one 
certainly  would  believe  that  it  was  "  scribbled  in 
great  haste." 

William  Overbury  to  Cromwell — II 

Emanuel. 

Faithful,  trusty  and  dearly  beloved  minister  unto  the 
high  power  of  Almighty  God,  of  that  which  you  have 
ministration  under  our  Sovereign  Lord  the  King,  here  in 
earth,  the  only  high  and  supreme  Head  of  this  His  Church  of 
England,  grace,  peace  and  mercy  be  evermore  with  you. 
Laud  and  thanks  be  to  God  the  Father  Almighty  for  the 
true  and  unfeigned  faith  that  you  have  in  our  sweet  Saviour 
Jesu.  Paul,  the  true  preacher  of  Christ,  saith  Fimdamentum 
aliud  nemo  potest  ponere  prceter  id  quod  posituvi  est,  quod  est 
Jesus  Christus.  Whosoever  believeth  Jesus  Christ  to  be 
only  Saviour  of  the  whole  world,  pacifier  of  God's  wrath, 
mediator  between  God  and  man,  the  bearer  of  sins  and  the 
true  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world, 
hath  now  set  this  foundation.  Therefore  it  is  to  be  trusted 
upon  that  where  Christ  is  the  foundation,  there  must  needs 
follow  the  edifying  and  building  of  good  works  as  testimony 
of  the  true  foundation.  Also  Christ  saith  Ego  su7n.  ostium. 
He  entereth  in  by  this  door,  the  which  feeleth  the  truth 
and,  preaching  the  same  to  others,  followeth  and  keepeth  it 
himself.  Paul  9  Corin.  ^ : —  Vce  enim  mihi  est  si  non  evan- 
gelizavero.  Necessitas  enim  mihi  incumhit.  Si  enim  volens 
hoc  ago,  mercedem  haheo.  Si  autem  inmtus,  dispensatio  Ttiihi 
credita  est.  Quce  est  ergo  merces  mea  t  etc.  This  doth  some 
take  upon  them,  diligently  executing  the  office  of  the  minis- 
tration of  the  word  of  God,  plainly,  sincerely,  following  the 
gracious  will  and  mind  of  our  gracious  Sovereign  Lord  the 
King,  being  only  high  and  Supreme  Head  of  this  Church  of 
England,  to  whose  high  power,  given  unto  him  from  God 
above,  it  pertaineth  by  the  ordinance  of  Almighty  God,  to 
send  workmen  into  the  harvest  or  vineyard  of  this  His 
Church,  of  the  which  his  Grace  is  the  only  high  Head  and 
governor  next  God.  Quomodo  audient  sine  2^'>'C(^dicante  ? 
Quomodo  vei'O  prccdicdbunt,  nisi  mittantur  ?  Sed  non  omnes 
ohediunt  Evangelio.  For  there  be  many  perverse  men  which 
do  dilaniate  the  flock  of  Christ — yea,  and  of  them  which 

1  Tlie  passage  is  in  1  Cor.  ix.  16-18. 


68  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

seem  to  men  to  be  the  pillars  or  bearers  up  of  the  Church, 
which  doth  rather  diminish  the  faith  than  anything 
augment  it. 

I  have  many  things  which  I  would  fain  declare  to  your 
goodness ;  but  I  consider  your  great  and  manifold  cure  and 
business,  and  mine  own  impediments  by  the  custom  and 
trades  of  men  ordained  that  let  me,  not  only  this  time  in 
this  my  rude  scribbling  to  you,  but  also  almost  at  all  times, 
from  both  study  and  exercise  of  the  Holy  Gospel,  the  true 
faith  and  doctrine  of  the  which  I  pray  God  augment  to  His 
honor ;  who  ever  preserve  and  keep  you.     Amen. 

Your  obediencer, 

William  Ovekbeky.^ 

The  address  of  this  letter,  which  was  doubtless  on 
a  fly-leaf,  has  not  been  preserved,  but  there  is  no 
question  whatever  that  it  was  addressed  to  Cromwell 
as  the  King's  Vicegerent  in  spiritual  things.  It  is  not 
exactly  pleasant  to  dwell  on  an  exhibition  of  arrant 
hypocrisy ;  but  that  some  few  monks,  finding  that, 
willingly  or  not,  they  and  their  brethren  had  to  live 
under  a  new  allegiance,  were  only  too  ready  to  give 
that  new  allegiance  a  religious  sanction  is  no  more 
than  the  necessities  of  the  case  would  naturally  lead 
us  to  expect.  Yet  historic,  if  not  religious,  sympathy 
must  deplore  the  sad  ruin  of  monasticism — a  system 
whose  great  aim  was  to  remove  men  from  worldly 
and  demoralising  influences — when  we  see  it  in  its 
last  days  helpless  before  tyranny,  obliged  even  to 
harbour  within  the  cloister  some  traitors  who  made  a 
religion  of  worldliness  and  subservience  to  earthly 
power.  ^ 

1  The  original  of  this  letter  is  in  MS.  Cott.,  Cleop.  E  vi.  261.  It  is 
printed  by  Strype  in  Ecclesiastical  Memorials,  i.  i.  316. 

2  As  for  John  Placidus,  I  presume  that  he  got  his  benefice  ;  for  though  he 
signed  with  his  brother  monks  the  acknowledgment  of  the  King's  supremacy  in 
August  1534  {L.  P.,  VII.  1211  (42)),  his  name  does  not  appear  in  the  pension 
list  of  the  monastery  in  December  1539  {L.  P.  xiv.  ii.  728).  Or  rather,  he  is  one 
of  seven  monks  who  signed  the  supremacy  in  1534,  and  who  were  not  pen- 
sioned at  the  dissolution  ;  for  it  is  curious  that  every  monk  of  this  monastery 
was  pensioned  under  a  different  surname  from  that  which  he  used  in  his 


cH.n      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  69 

Yet  one  more  documentary  illustration  may  be 
permitted,  to  show  how  the  new  state  of  matters 
affected  abbots,  who,  having  hitherto  had  undisturbed 
control  of  their  houses,  could  even  have  called  in  the 
aid  of  the  civil  power  at  any  time  to  prevent  the 
escape  of  disaffected  brethren  seeking  to  run  away. 
Now  it  was  a  different  story  when  a  monk  desiring 
to  lodge  a  complaint  against  his  superior  had  facilities 
given  him  by  the  authorities  to  go  up  to  London. 
It  is  thus  the  Abbot  of  Brewerne  in  Oxfordshire  writes 
to  Cromwell :  ^ —  ^ 

The  Abbot  of  Brewerne  to  Cromwell 

Plight  worshipful  and  my  very  singular  good  master,  I  at 
have  me  heartily  commended  unto  your  good  mastership,  Brewerne 
most  instantly  desiring  you  of  your  help  and  counsel,  which  I  ^  ^^' 
shall  deserve  by  God's  grace.  So  it  is,  as  I  am  informed, 
that  I  was  indicted  three  times  at  Oxford  the  6th  day  of  this 
present  April.  First  was  for  a  riot,  the  second  of  ravine  (?), 
the  third  of  murder.  I  know  no  cause  why  they  should  so 
do,  I  take  God  to  record.  As  for  the  riot,  they  lay  it  unto 
me  because  I  perceived  by  one  that  told  me  privily  Easter 
day  at  afternoon  that  one  of  my  monks,  which  is  now  in 
London,  he  intended  that  night  of  Easter  day  at  midnight  to 
take  his  journey,  as  I  heard,  towards  London,  and  I  sent  one 
of  my  servants  to  my  friend  Master  Whyteney,  which 
dwelleth  within  two  miles  of  me,  desiring  him  to  send  two 
or  three  servants  of  his  with  my  servant,  to  watch  till  after 
midnight  for  the  same  monk  a  quarter  of  a  mile  fro  the 
Abbey ;  and  so  he  came  about  midnight  with  a  horse  which 
one  of  the  sheriff's  servants  lent  him  to  take  his  journey 
upon ;  which  servant  was  commanded  by  his  master  to  wait 
on  me  because  I  have  but  few  servants  and  am  amongst 
them  every  day  in  jeopardy  of  my  life.  But  that  servant  of 
the  sheriffs  hath  done  there  much  hurt  in  giving  my  monks 

signature.  One  or  two  of  the  seven  may  have  died  in  the  meanwhile,  but  I 
suspect  that  Placidus  got  the  benefice  he  so  much  wanted  ;  for  there  were 
only  two  Johns  who  received  pensions,  the  prior  and  the  sub-prior,  and  he  can 
hardly  be  identified  with  either  of  them. 

^  This  letter  has  unhappily  been  omitted  by  oversight  in  the  Letters  and 
Papers.     It  is  in  MS.  Cott.,  Cleop.  E  iv.  100. 


70    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

evil  counsel,  and  of  a  very  likelihood  by  his  master's  setting 
on.  So  that  night  my  servant  with  Master  Whyteney's 
servants  took  the  monk  and  carried  him  to  Master  Whyteney's 
unto  they  knew  my  pleasure ;  and  for  so  taking  of  my  monk 
(as  I  perceive)  they  have  indicted  me  of  a  riot.  And  so  the 
Monday  in  the  morning  my  convent  had  knowledge  that 
their  messenger  was  so  taken,  they  raised  a  great  many  of 
lewd  fellows  abroad  in  the  country,  which  came  to  my 
abbey  and  threatened  to  pluck  me  out  of  my  house  unless  I 
would  fet  the  monk  again.  And  so  they  kept  me  in  to  my 
chamber  all  day  till  even  song  time,  and  I  dare  in  no  wise 
come  out.  So  the  said  Master  Whytteney  had  knowledge 
how  I  was  dealt  withal ;  he  being  of  the  fee  of  the  house,  as 
injoined  in  patent  with  his  father-in-law-,  Master  Robert 
Wye,  as  stewards  of  our  courts,  he  could  do  no  less  but  come 
to  me  with  his  servants,  intending  hurt  to  no  man.  So,  soon 
after  his  coming,  which  was  about  three  of  the  clock,  many 
of  his  neighbours,  which  heai-d  that  he  had  gone  to  Brewern, 
came  after  him ;  and  after  that  came  the  sheriff,  whom  I  had 
sent  for  in  the  morning,  and  he  was  greatly  discontented 
because  Master  Whyteney  was  there ;  and  for  that  cause 
they  have  indicted  the  said  Mr.  Whytteney  and  all  that 
came  with  him  for  a  unlawful  assembly.  Therefore,  in  the 
honour  of  God,  be  good  unto  me  and  to  my  friends,  for  the 
sheriff  is  heavy  master  to  me  and  to  as  many  as  taketh  part 
with  me.  Yor  such  as  came  to  pluck  me  out  by  the  head, 
as  they  said  they  would,  were  nothing  spoke  to ;  but  such  as 
would  have  holp  me  if  need  had  required,  were  indicted  ; 
and  the  sheriff,  as  I  heard,  gave  evidence  himself  and  panelled 
a  quest  for  the  same  at  his  pleasure ;  whereby  I  think  he  did 
wrong.  Therefore,  for  the  love  of  God,  be  good  unto  me  in  this 
my  heinous  business,  and  I  shall  deserve  your  pains  with  my 
heart  and  prayer,  as  knoweth  Almighty  God  my  whole  mind, 
who  ever  preserve  you.     Fro  Brewern,  the  9th  day  of  April. 

All  yours  unfeigned, 

The  poor  Abbot  of  Brewern. 

If  monks  ought  to  have  been  protected  by  their 
rule  and  the  respect  in  which  it  had  always  been  held 
from  the  evil  influences  of  a  secular  tyranny,  even 
more  so  should  nuns  have  been ;  but  it  is  only  too 
evident  that  they  were  not.  Nuns  under  twenty-five 
years  of  age  were  turned  out  of  their  convents,  and 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  71 

one  of  the  commissaries  sent  on  this  business  (no 
doubt  Dr.  Legh)  addressed  the  ladies  in  an  immodest 
way.  They  rebuked  his  insolence,  and  said  he  was 
violating  their  apostolic  privileges ;  but  he  replied 
that  he  himself  had  more  power  from  the  King  than 
the  whole  Apostolic  See.  The  nuns,  having  no  other 
appeal,  made  their  remonstrance  to  Cromwell ;  but  he 
in  reply  said  these  things  were  but  a  prologue  of  that 
which  was  to  come.^ 

So  the  occurrence  was  reported  at  the  time  by 
Chapuys  in  England  to  Dr.  Ortiz,  the  Imperial  agent 
at  Eome ;  and  Sanders,  who  though  then  only  eight 
years  old,  was  much  better  informed  and  more  accu- 
rate about  many  things  when  he  wrote  than  past 
historians  have  believed,  says  distinctly  that  Legh,  as  Dr.  Legh'; 
a  means  of  discharging  the  duties  imposed  upon  him,  towards 
solicited  the  nuns  to  breach  of  chastity,  and  that  he  nuns. 
spoke  of  nothing  more  readily  than  of  sexual  impurity ; 
for  the  visitation  was  appointed  expressly  for  the  pur- 
pose that  the  King  might  catch  at  every  pretext  for 
overthrowing  the  monasteries."  The  tradition  of 
this  abominable  procedure,  as  is  shown  even  by  the 
Protestant  historian  Fuller,  was  kept  alive  for 
some  generations  by  the  just  indignation  of  Roman 
Catholics  ;  and  Fuller  himself  reports  as  a  fact  circum- 
stantially warranted  by  the  tradition  of  papists,  the 
story  of  one  of  those  base  attempts  in  a  nunnery 
some  miles  from  Cambridge.  It  is,  moreover,  quite 
evident  that  Fuller  himself,  with  every  desire  to  dis- 
credit the  story,  was  far  from  being  convinced  that  it 
was  altogether  untrue.  If  false,  indeed,  the  tradi- 
tion must  have  been  very  elaborately  supported  by 
further  falsehood ;  for  it  is  stated  that  one  of  the 
agents  afterwards  confessed  to  Sir  William  Stanley, 
who  served  in  the  Low  Countries  in  the  time  of 
Queen  Elizabeth,  "  that  nothing  in  all  his  life  lay 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  873. 
^  Historia  Schismatis  Anglicani,  p.  105  (ed.  Cologne,  1628). 


72  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

more  heavy  on  his  conscience  than  this  false  accusa- 
tion of  those  innocents."  ^ 

It  was  on  the  4th  June  1535  that  Dr.  Richard 
Layton,  Clerk  of  the  Council,  wrote  to  Cromwell 
desiring  a  commission  for  himself  and  Dr.  Thomas 
Legh  to  visit  the  North  of  England  as  Cromwell's 
commissaries  in  the  general  visitation  which  was  then 
resolved  upon.  As  many  were  likely  to  apply  for 
such  offices,  he  assured  Cromwell  he  would  find  no 
more  trusty  agents  anywhere.  Cromwell,  he  said, 
required  instruments  such  as  would  be  to  him  another 
self,  and  as  they  both  owed  their  preferment  in  the 
King's  service  to  him,  he  might  be  perfectly  sure  of 
their  "  true  hearts  and  minds."  There  was  not  a 
monastery  or  cell  in  the  North  "  but  either  Dr.  Legh 
or  I,"  he  wrote,  "  have  familiar  acquaintance  within 
ten  or  twelve  miles  of  it,  so  that  no  knavery  can  be 
hid  from  us  in  that  country."  They  would  also  find 
friends  and  kinsfolk  ready  to  assist  them  "  if  any 
stubborn  or  sturdy  carle  might  perchance  be  found 
rebellious."  Layton,  moreover,  had  drawn  up  articles 
of  inquiry  for  such  a  visitation  twelve  months  before, 
which  would  serve  to  detect  all  abuses  hitherto 
cloaked  and  coloured  by  so-called  reformers  ;  for  each 
particular  religious  rule  had  "  by  friendship  found 
crafty  means  to  be  their  own  visitors,"  who  intended 
no  real  reform,  "  but  only  to  keep  secret  all  matters 
of  mischief,"  and  who  hastened  the  ruin  of  the 
monasteries  by  selling  their  jewels  and  plate  at  half 
their  value  for  ready  money.  Such  was  the  purport 
of  his  letter.^ 

Again  he  wrote  to  him  that  the  diocese  of  York 
had  not  been  visited  since  Wolsey's  time,  and  within 

^  Fuller's  Church  History  (ed.  1845),  iii.  385.  Compare  what  is  said 
before  in  pp.  382-4.  The  nunnery  may  have  been  Chatteris.  Fuller  says 
"within  twelve  miles  of  Cambridge,"  but  miles  as  commonly  computed  were 
generally  much  longer  than  our  statute  miles.  The  penitent  Visitor  was,  no 
doubt,  Ap  Rice. 

^  Wright's  Sup2>.  of  the  Monasteries,  pp.  156,  157. 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  73 

the  province  there  were  many  things  that  required 
reformation,  especially  among  the  exempt  monasteries. 
Archbishop  Lee  forbore  to  do  anything,  awaiting  the 
King's  visitation  ;  but  if  Layton  were  sent  thither, 
with  Blitheman  as  registrar,  he  could  finish  the  whole 
province  by  Michaelmas,  while  Dr.  Legh  could  finish 
by  the  same  time  the  counties  of  Huntingdon  and 
Lincolnshire  and  the  diocese  of  Chester — that  is  to 
say,  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield.  The  matter  was 
urgent,  for  if  Cromwell  deferred  the  visitation  till  he 
had  leisure,  it  was  to  be  feared  that  day  would  never 
come,  and  if  he  waited  till  Lammas,  when  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbmy  had  finished  his  visitation,  the 
year  would  be  far  spent.  The  Archbishop  and  his 
officers  would  be  very  glad  if  Cromwell  did  not  visit 
at  all.  But  there  was  no  better  way  of  beating  the 
King's  authority  as  Supreme  Head  into  the  heads  of 
that  rude  northern  people,  who  were  more  super- 
stitious than  virtuous.  Towards  the  end  of  this 
second  letter  he  writes  that  Cromwell  will  never  know 
what  he  can  do  till  he  tries  him.^ 

The  desired  commission  was  given  to  Legh  and 
Layton,  and  even  something  more.  It  would  have 
been  a  pity,  no  doubt,  to  confine  the  functions  of  such 
useful  tools  to  a  visitation  of  the  North  of  England, 
when  they  had  to  pass  through  the  South,  or  at  least 
the  Midlands,  in  order  to  get  there.  So  they  were 
to  take  the  South  of  England  first,  each  going  by  a  circuits 
different  route  and  collecting  what  information  he  jJJ^^'^g^j^ 
could  get  that  would  be  serviceable  for  the  King's  visitors. 
purpose.  Leaving  the  Court  in  Gloucestershire, 
Layton  visited,  among  other  places,  Bath  and  Bristol 
before  he  came  to  Oxford  and  revolutionised  the 
university  studies  in  the  manner  we  have  seen.  He 
then  visited  in  Surrey  and  Sussex,  and  was  at  Sion 
monastery  in  December,  where  he  got  one  Bishop  to 
preach  and  declare  the  King's  title,  though  he  pro- 
1  L.  p.,  VIII.  955. 


74    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

fessed  to  have  discovered  many  gross  scandals  against 
him  the  day  before,  and  he  intended  to  make  further 
inquiry  about  intercourse  between  the  monks  and 
the  nuns.^  Meanwhile  his  colleague  Legh,  after 
passing  through  Wiltshire  and  Hampshire,  visited 
Reading,  Chertsey,  and  Merton  Abbeys,  came  to 
London  at  Michaelmas,  and  went  on  through  Cam- 
bridgeshire and  Bury  St.  Edmunds  to  report  on  the 
houses  on  his  way  into  Norfolk  and  Suffolk.  Very 
foul  reports  were  transmitted  to  Cromwell  by  both 
Visitors  of  the  state  of  many  of  the  monasteries  ;  but 
it  is  noticeable  amonsj  other  evidences  tending  to 
discredit  these  statements  that  whereas  Dr.  Legh, 
when  he  visited  Chertsey,  found  a  considerable 
number  of  the  monks  guilty  of  the  grossest  possible 
impurity,  Bishop  Gardiner  and  Treasurer  Fitzwilliam 
had  not  long  before  visited  the  abbey  by  the  King's 
orders  and  found  nothing  wrong. ^  That  Bishop 
Gardiner  was  at  all  anxious  to  overlook  immorality 
within  his  own  diocese  there  is  certainly  no  reason  to 
believe. 

From   the    Eastern    Counties    Dr.   Legh    turned 

towards  the  Midlands  and  met  his  colleague  Lay  ton, 

by  appointment,  at  Lichfield  about  Christmas.     From 

that  time  the  two  journeyed  in  company,  and  were  at 

York  together  on  the  11th  January  1536.     They  had 

each  done  a  very  considerable  amount  of  travelling, 

to  say  nothing  more,  between  August  and  the  New 

Their        Year.     At  York,  on  the   11th,  they  were  with  the 

to'^the^^°°^  Archbishop,    whom    they    enjoined    to    preach    the 

Arch-         King's  prerogative  and  to  get  other  capable  men  to 

Yorkf  ^     do  the  same ;    also  to  bring  up  to   Cromwell  "  his 

first,   second,   and  third  foundations   whereupon   he 

enjoy eth  his  ofiice  and  prerogative  power,  with  the 

grants,  privileges  and  concessions  given  to  him,  and 

to  his  See  appertaining."     Dr.  Legh   had  no  doubt 

^  L.  p.,  IX.  (see  index).     Wright's  Sttpp.,  pp.  47,  48. 
-  L.  P.,  IX.  472. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  75 

that  when  Cromwell  read  them  he  would  find  many- 
things  worthy  of  reformation  ;  and,  moreover,  that  if 
the  King  and  Cromwell  would  take  like  order  with 
other  bishops  it  would  greatly  "  edify  "  those  under 
their  government  in  Christ  and  his  teaching,  and 
enlighten  many  poor,  blind,  ignorant  persons.  It 
would,  moreover,  tend  to  the  preservation  of  their 
loyalty  to  the  King  and  his  successors — of  course 
meaning  his  issue  by  Anne  Boleyn,  about  whose 
succession  there  might  well  have  been  misgivings.^ 

It  was  Dr.  Lay  ton,  however,  who  appears  to  have 
handled  Archbishop  Lee  most  rigorously,  examining 
him  closely  about  his  communications  with  the 
General  Confessor  of  Sion  ;  and  the  Archbishop  wrote 
a  letter  to  Cromwell  the  same  day  in  his  own  ex- 
culpation.' Lay  ton  seems  now  to  have  been  in  his 
element.  He  had  discovered  worse  abominations  in 
the  religious  houses  of  Yorkshire,  even  than  in  the 
South ;  and  he  fully  expected,  as  he  wrote,  when  he 
began  that  day  with  the  great  Abbey  of  St.  Mary's 
at  York,  "  to  find  much  evil  disposition  both  in  the 
abbot  and  the  convent."  ^ 

The  two  Visitors  next  wrote  a  joint  letter  from  They 
Kichmond    on    the    20th,    showing    that    they    had  Abbot  of  ^ 
deposed  the  Abbot  of  Fountains  for  notorious  profli-  Fountains, 
gacy,  theft,  perjury,  and  squandering  the  goods  of  menrfor" 
his  house.     They  warned  Cromwell ,  however,  that  if  ^^^  suc- 
the  Earl   of  Cumberland  knew  that  the  monastery  who  win 
was  vacant,  he  would  urge  the  claims  of  the  cellarer  p^^,7^^^ 
to  be  made  abbot ;  but  they  considered  him   unfit,  pkce. 
for    reasons  which    Layton    knew    Cromwell    would 
agree    with   when    he   had    an    opportunity    of    ex- 
plaining   them.       In    fact   there    was    not    a   monk 
resident    in   the    house   fit    for   the   place,    in    their 
opinion,   and   they   recommended  to    Cromwell    one 
Marmaduke,  then  resident   on   a  prebend  at  Ripon, 

1  Wright's  S^qjp.,  pp.  95,  96.  "^  L.  P.,  x.  93. 

*  Wright's  S%px>.,  p.  97. 


76    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

"  the  wisest  monk  within  England  of  that  coat  and 
well  learned,  20  years  officer  and  ruler  of  all  that 
house,  a  wealthy  fellow  which  will  give  you  600 
marks  to  make  him  abbot  there,  and  pay  you 
immediately  after  the  election  without  delay  or 
respite."  Perhaps  we  may  surmise  from  these  w^ords 
the  nature  of  the  cellarer's  disqualification,  which  the 
Visitors  would  not  commit  to  paper.  There  is  a 
sentence  further  on  in  the  letter  which  is  not  a  little 
significant :  "  And  we  suppose  that  many  other  of 
the  best  abbots  mo,  after  they  have  communed  with 
your  mastership  and  us  will  come  to  like  prefer- 
ment." ^  We  can  imagine  pretty  well  what  was  the 
most  important  element  in  such  conversation. 

Before  the  end  of  January  the  two  Visitors  had 
entered  the  Bishopric  of  Durham,  where  the  gentle 
Bishop  Tunstall  received  them  with  peculiar  honour, 
and  on  their  departure  sent  a  large  company  of  his 
servants  to  escort  them  from  Auckland  half  way 
to  Durham  Abbey.  Legh  felt  particularly  pleased. 
"  Both  we  and  our  company,"  he  WTote,  "  had  large 
rewards,  thus  setting  an  example  to  the  people,  and 
especially  to  the  abbots,  of  their  duty  towards  their 
prince,  and  how  they  ought  to  accept  him  as  their 
Supreme  Head."  Since  the  King  had  conquered 
him  in  argument  on  this  subject  five  years  before, 
Tunstall  had  not  only  become  submissive  to  royal 
supremacy  himself  but  a  strenuous  supporter  of  the 
doctrine.  He  had  been  preaching  it  in  various  parts 
of  his  diocese,  with  the  result  that  no  part  of  the 
realm  was  in  better  order  in  that  respect,  and  Legh 
strongly  recommended  that  the  King  or  Cromwell 
should  urge  him  to  write  a  book  upon  the  subject,  so 
many  learned  men  would  be  guided  by  his  opinion. 
Their  con-  Tliis  advicc  was  backed  up  by  Layton,  who  was 
witr*'°°  quite  astonished  at  the  Bishop's  learning  and  power 
Bishop       of  argument  in   discussing  the    question.      He   had 

Tunstall. 

1  Wright,  100-102. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  77 

imagined  he  himself  knew  all  that  could  be  said 
about  it ;  "  but  when  I  heard  his  learning,"  he  wrote, 
"  and  how  deeply  he  had  searched  into  this  usurped 
power,  I  thought  myself  the  veriest  fool  in  England."  ^ 

On  the  3rd  February  they  were  at  Whitby,  where  The  Abbot 
they  expected  to  get  the  abbot  to  resign  ;  but  he  °^  whit^y- 
declined  to  do  so,  and  they  left  a  set  of  the  usual 
injunctions,  so  hard  to  keep  that  the  abbot  wrote  to 
Cromwell  for  their  relaxation.  By  one  of  them  he 
was  bound  to  provide  horse  and  money  for  any  of 
his  brethren  who  wished  to  go  to  Cromwell  to  com- 
plain that  the  injunctions  were  violated.  He  really 
thought  a  monk  desiring  to  complain  might  first 
show  his  complaint  to  himself  before  four  or  six  of 
his  seniors.^ 

The  whole  visitation  seems  to  have  been  com- 
pleted in  February.  The  report  of  the  Visitors  was 
drawn  up  opportunely  for  the  last  session  of  Henry 
Vni.'s  "  Long  Parliament,"  which  began  on  the  4th 
of  that  month,  and  continued  its  sittings  till  Good 
Friday,  the  14th  April,  when  it  was  dissolved.^  By 
the  middle  of  March  the  Act  had  been  passed  for  the 
dissolution  of  all  monasteries  under  £200  a  year  in 
value.*  In  the  preamble  of  this  statute^  it  was 
strangely  declared  that  vice  was  daily  practised  in 
small  monasteries  of  monks,  canons,  and  nuns,  where 
the  number  of  the  religious  persons  was  under 
twelve ;  that  all  the  visitations  for  the  last  two 
hundred  years  had  failed  to  correct  the  evil,  and  that 
the  only  cure  was  to  suppress  such  houses  and 
transfer  the  inmates  to  larger  and  better  regulated 
monasteries,  where  they  might  be  compelled  to  live 
religiously.  These  statements,  it  was  said,  were 
vouched  for  by  the  "  compertes  "  of  the  recent  visita- 
tion, as  well  as  "by  sundry  credible  informations" — 

1  i.  p.,  X.  182,  183.  ^  L.  p.,  X.  238,  239. 

'^  L.  P.,  X.  669.  ^  L.  P.,  X.  494. 

5  Stat.  27  Hen.  VIII.  c.  28. 


78  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

The  Act  of  a  beautifully  vague  expression  to  justify  an  act  of 

Sra^of  the  plunder.     But  there  is  no  clear  evidence  that  these 

smaller       "  compcrtes,"    or   findings,    of  the   recent   visitation 

teries^        Were  Submitted  to  Parliament.     They  seem  rather  to 

professedly  havc  been  private  and  confidential  communications 

the  report"  transmitted  to  Cromwell,  accusing  a  large  number  of 

of  the        monks  and  nuns  in  difierent  monasteries  (who  were 

never  heard   in   their   own   defence)    of   very   gross 

impurities.       A  Compendium  compertorum.  for   the 

province  of  York  and  the  diocese  of  Coventry  and 

Lichfield   still   remains,    drawn    up    in   the  hand  of 

Ap  Rice,  the  registrar  who  accompanied  Dr.  Legh.^ 

There  also  exist  two  similar  documents  in  the  same 

hand  relating  to  the  monasteries  in  Norwich  diocese. 

Neither  of  these  papers  bears  out  the  statement  that 

the  smaller  monasteries  were  more  disorderly   than 

the  large  ;  but  if  the  reports  were  at  all  trustworthy, 

many  of  the  large  houses   as  well   as  of  the  small 

were  dens  of  infamous  vice. 

The  reports,  however,  will  hardly  command  much 
credit  from  the  student  of  contemporary  State  papers. 
That  abuses  may  have  existed  in  some  monasteries, 
and  that  impurities  from  laxity  of  rule  may  not  have 
been  efiectually  dealt  with,  are  facts  that  we  might 
presume  as  probable  from  the  infirmity  of  human 
nature ;  but  before  we  can  believe  that  the  abomina- 
tions were  anything  like  so  gross  as  were  reported, 
we  ought  to  have  better  evidence  of  the  honesty  and 
truthfulness  of  the  Visitors  than  appears,  even  in  the 
light  of  their  own  reports.  Some  of  those  filthy 
revelations,  indeed,  are  of  a  nature  that  could  only 
have  been  known,  if  true,  through  the  confessional,  and 
that  any  of  the  monks  or  nuns  chose  Legh  or  Layton 
for  a  confessor  is  past  belief.  But  to  estimate  the 
value  of  the  inquiry,  even  in  a  general  way,  we  should 
require  to  know  the  processes  used,  and  of  these  the 
evidence  is  very  unsatisfactory.     That  the  visitation 

1  L.  p.,  X,  364. 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  79 

was  deeply  resented  by  most  of  the  houses  there  is 
very  little  doubt.  Legh  and  Ap  Eice  themselves 
confessed  that  the  greatest  houses  were  "so  con- 
federate by  reason  of  their  heads  being  mere  Pharisees" 
that  they  could  get  no  "  compertes."  If  that  were 
the  temper  of  many  of  the  monasteries,  what  sort  of 
attitude  would  they  or  others  have  maintained  when 
questioned  by  Visitors  for  whom  they  had  no  respect  ? 
Ap  Rice  considered  the  Abbey  of  Bury  St.  Edmunds 
to  be  confederate  and  determined  to  confess  nothing.^ 
So  also  Dr.  Layton  found  the  Abbey  of  Leicester. 
The  abbot  there,  he  said,  was  an  honest  man,  but  his 
canons  most  obstinate  and  factious.  He  proposes, 
therefore,  to  call  some  of  them  before  him,  object  to 
them  unnatural  crimes,  and  on  their  denial,  descend 
gradually  to  less  heinous  offences.^  If  this  was  the 
process  used  in  other  cases,  what  likelihood  is  there 
that  a  true  result  was  elicited  ?  The  worst  was  sur- 
mised at  the  beginning ;  each  monk  was  supposed  to 
be  guilty  before  he  was  found  innocent,  and  how  far 
his  indignant  disclaimers  were  regarded  we  do  not 
know.  Very  likely  many  remained  silent  before  a 
judge  whom  they  did  not  acknowledge,  and  silence 
may  have  been  taken  as  tantamount  to  a  confession 
of  guilt.  It  is  to  be  presumed,  moreover,  that  in 
their  rapid  survey  of  the  houses — far  too  hurried 
to  have  been  anything  like  a  judicial  inquiry — the 
Visitors  occasionally  accepted  mere  gossip  and  scandal 
as  if  they  had  been  well-ascertained  facts. 

There  may  have  been  cases,  indeed,  where  the 
monasteries  had  sufficient  reason  to  dread  inquiry. 
The  nunnery  of  Crabhouse  in  Norfolk,  anticipating  the 
coming  of  the  Visitors,  sold  its  lands  and  goods,  and 
the  inmates  prepared  to  desert  the  house  and  go  away 
before  the  visitation.^  The  Visitors  found  that  the 
prioress  and  three  nuns  had  children  ;  *  which  may 

1  Wriiiht,  p.  85.  -  Ibid.,  p.  93. 

-  L.  P.,  IX.  808.  ■»  L.  P.,  X.  364  (p.  144). 


8o    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

have  been  the  case,  though  the  testimony  is  suspicious. 
This  nunnery  was  at  Wiggenhall  on  the  Ouse,  some 
miles  above  Lynn,  in  a  marshy  country,  perhaps  not 
sufficiently  looked  after.  We  know,  in  fact,  that 
there  had  been  scandals  there  in  times  past,  and  now 
there  may  have  been  new  ones.^  But  the  possibility 
that  in  the  whole  of  England  there  may  have  been 
a  few  ill  -  regulated  monastic  houses  with  unchaste 
inmates  is  no  argument  against  the  character  of  the 
monasteries  as  a  whole. 

The  labours  of  the  Visitors,  however,  had  supplied 

the  King  with   all   the    information   he   required — 

possibly  even  more  than  he  expected — in  order  to 

make  up  a  case  to  go  before  Parliament.     And  how 

Use  made  he  used  their  report  we  know  almost  in  detail.     For 

Visitors'     ^^^  presumptiou  is  a  very  strong  one  that  the  follow- 

report.      ing  cxtract  from  a  contemporary  letter  refers  to  the 

introduction  of  the  measure   for  the  suppression  of 

the  smaller  monasteries  : — 

On  Saturday  in  the  Ember  week  ^  the  King's  Grace  came 
in  among  the  burgesses  of  the  Parliament,  and  delivered 
them  a  bill,  and  bade  them  look  upon  it  and  weigh  it  in 
conscience ;  for  he  would  not,  he  said,  have  them  pass  on  it 
nor  on  any  other  thing  because  his  Grace  giveth  in  the  bill, 
but  they  to  see  if  it  be  for  a  common  weal  to  his  subjects 
and  have  an  eye  thitherward.  Ancf  on  Wednesday  next  he 
will  be  there  again  to  hear  their  minds.^ 

There  is  a  fine  Tudor  irony  in  the  proceeding. 
The  House  of  Commons  had  been  jealous  of  its  privi- 
leges even  in  Wolsey's  time,  and  hesitated  at  first,  it 
is  said,  to  admit  the  Cardinal,  at  least  with  his  whole 

^  At  au  episcopal  visitation  of  this  house  in  1514  two  of  the  nuns  reported 
that  Dame  Agnes  Smyth  had  children  in  the  priory,  and  she  herself  confessed 
that  one  Simon  Prentes  got  her  with  child.  At  the  next  visitation,  six  years 
later,  the  report  was,  "Omnia  bene  juxta  facultates." — Jessopp's  Norwich 
Visitations  (Camden  Soc),  pp.  108-110,  168. 

^  The  letter  is  dated  13th  March  and  refers  to  Ember  week  in  Lent,  in 
which  the  Saturday  would  be  the  11th  March.  The  writer  is  one  Thomas 
Dorset. 

*  Wright's  Sup])7-ession,  pp.  38,  39. 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  8i 

train,  when  he  brought  a  message  from  the  King/ 
But  the  privileges,  as  understood  in  that  age,  were 
saved,  alike  when  Wolsey  entered  the  House  and  now 
when  the  King  himself  did.  Neither  Wolsey  nor  the 
King  himself  remained  to  hear  a  debate  ;  each  simply 
left  a  message.  But  the  message  in  this  case  required 
an  answer  by  the  following  Wednesday.  They  were  to 
use  a  perfectly  independent  judgment,  but  on  Wednes- 
day following  the  King  would  come  again  to  know 
what  conclusion  they  had  arrived  at.  A  House 
composed,  as  we  have  seen,  completely  of  dependents 
of  the  Court,  knew  perfectly  well  what  that  meant. 

It  had  already  been  rumoured,  as  early  as  the  3rd 
March,  that  a  measure  was  in  contemplation  for  the 
suppression  of  abbeys  and  priories  under  300  marks 
(that  is,  £200)  a  year  in  value,  or  having  fewer 
inmates  than  twelve.^  But  the  bill,  though  thus 
clearly  foreshadowed,  both  in  its  effect  and  in  its 
preamble,  had  evidently  not  yet  been  introduced ; 
and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  its  introduction  was 
delayed  ten  days  on  account  of  the  very  unpopularity 
of  the  proposal.  On  the  18th  March,  Chapuys  writes  Act  for  the 
to  the  Emperor  that  it  had  passed  the  legislature.^  si^fonhe 
The  Act  was  one  of  various  schemes  talked  about  for  smaller 
augmenting  the  revenues  of  the  Crown ;  along  with 
which  the  King  was  also  considering  how  to  employ 
robust  mendicants  in  public  works,  such  as  the 
making  of  Dover  harbour  * — a  work  of  high  import- 

1  Roper's  More,  pp.  20,  21  (ed.  1817).  ^  z.  P.,  x.  406. 

^  L.  P.,  X.  494  (p,  200).  It  may  be  noted  that  the  Wednesday  on  which 
the  King  promised  to  pay  a  second  visit  to  the  House  of  Commons  would  be 
the  15th  iMarch.  We  unfortunately  have  not  the  Journals  of  the  House  of 
Lords  for  this  year,  which  would  have  shown  the  day  when  the  bill  came  up 
from  the  Commons  and  the  day  it  was  passed. 

■*  Compare  with  last  reference  the  passage  immediately  following  the 
extract  already  made  from  Thomas  Dorset's  letter  in  Wright,  p.  39  :  "There 
shall  be  a  provision  made  for  poor  people.  The  gaols  shall  be  rid,  the  faulty 
shall  die,  and  the  other  shall  be  acquit  by  proclamation  or  by  jury  and  shall 
be  set  at  liberty  and  pay  no  fees  ;  and  sturdy  beggars  and  such  prisoners  as 
cannot  be  set  a-work  shall  be  set  a-work  at  the  King's  charge,  some  at  Dover 
and  some  at  the  place  where  the  water  hath  broken  in  on  the  land,  and  other 
mo  places.  Then  if  they  fall  to  idleness,  the  idlers  shall  be  had  before  a 
justice  of  the  peace,"  etc. 

VOL.  II  G 


monas- 
teries. 


82    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  hi 

ance,  of  course,  for  the  defence  of  the  kingdom  in 
case  an  invasion  were  attempted  to  give  effect  to  a 
papal  interdict.     What  was  thought  of  these  other 
measures  does  not  much  concern  us ;    but  as  to  the 
suppression  of  the  smaller  monasteries  the  tradition 
remained  to  the  days  of  Sir  Henry  Spelman,  a  hundred 
years  later,   that   even   this  subservient  Parliament 
only  agreed  to  it  under  the  gravest  possible  menaces.^ 
On  the  other  hand,   we  have  the  contemporary 
evidence  of  Latimer,   not   unfrequently  referred  to 
What        as    evidence    of    the    gross    demoralisation    of    the 
itdTbout   nionasteries,  that  "  when  their  enormities  were  first 
it.  read  in  the  Parliament  house,  they  were  so  great  and 

abominable  that  there  was  nothing  but  '  Down  with 
them ' ! "  To  weigh  this  testimony  truly,  however, 
we  must  consider  the  time  at  which  it  was  uttered 
and  the  general  drift  of  the  argument  the  speaker 
was  employing.  It  is  contained  in  the  second  sermon 
preached  by  Latimer  before  King  Edward  VL  One 
great  object  of  the  preacher  was  to  maintain  the 
fulness  of  the  royal  authority,  even  though  the  King 
was  under  age — to  answer  those  who,  because  Edward 
was  but  a  child,  said,  "  Tush,  this  gear  will  not  tarry  ; 
it  is  but  my  lord  Protector's  and  my  lord  of  Canter- 
bury's doing."  He  accordingly  descants  on  the  high 
duties  of  a  king,  and,  among  other  things,  on  the 
importance  of  encouraging  sound  scriptural  preaching, 
even  by  promoting  learned  laymen  to  the  work  while 
negligent  bishops  and  clergy  should  be  displaced. 
"  But  I  fear  one  thing,"  he  says  ;  "  and  it  is,  lest  for 
a  safety  of  a  little  money,  you  will  put  in  chantry 

^  "  It  is  true  that  Parliament  did  give  them  to  him,  but  so  unwillingly  (as 
I  have  heard)  that  when  the  bill  had  stuck  long  in  the  Lower  House  and  could 
get  no  passage,  he  commanded  the  Commons  to  attend  him  in  the  forenoon 
in  his  gallery,  where  he  let  them  wait  till  late  in  the  afternoon,  and  then, 
coming  out  of  his  chamber,  walking  a  turn  or  two  amongst  them,  first  on  the 
one  side  and  then  on  the  other,  at  last,  '  I  hear,'  saith  he,  '  that  my  bill  will 
not  pass,  but  I  will  have  it  pass,  or  I  will  have  some  of  your  heads,'  and 
without  other  rhetoric  or  persuasion  returned  to  his  chamber.  Enough  was 
said,  the  bill  passed,  and  all  was  given  him  as  he  desired." — Spelman's 
History  of  Sacrilege,  ed.  1853,  p.  206. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  83 

priests  to  save  their  pensions."  Chantries  had  by 
this  time  been  put  down  and  their  priests  pensioned 
off;  but  the  pensions  were  discontinued  when  benefices 
of  equal  value  were  provided  for  them.  And  though 
Latimer  did  not  object  to  this  in  the  case  of  chantry 
priests  who  could  preach,  he  did  not  like  it  as  a  mere 
piece  of  economy.  "  I  will  tell  you,"  he  continues, 
"  Christ  bought  souls  with  his  blood,  and  will  ye  sell 
them  for  gold  or  silver  ?  I  would  not  that  ye  should 
do  with  chantry  priests  as  ye  did  with  the  abbots 
when  abbeys  were  put  down.  For  when  their  enormi- 
ties were  first  read  in  the  Parliament  house,  they 
were  so  great  and  abominable  that  there  was  nothing 
but  '  Down  with  them  ! '  But  within  a  while  after, 
the  same  abbots  were  made  bishops,  as  there  be  some 
of  them  yet  alive,  to  save  and  redeem  their  pensions. 
0  Lord !  think  ye  that  God  is  a  fool  and  seeth  it 
not  ?     And  if  He  see  it,  will  He  not  punish  it  ? "  ^ 

It  is  doing  no  more  than  justice  to  Latimer's 
zeal  for  righteousness  to  quote  this  passage  at 
length ;  for  he  distinctly  points  to  a  shameful  blot 
on  past  administration.  And  therein  let  us  follow 
him,  seeing  that  he  helps  us  so  greatly  to  weigh  the 
specious  pretence  of  morality  used  as  a  justification 
for  the  suppression  of  the  smaller  monasteries. 
"  Their  enormities,"  forsooth,  "  were  read  in  Parlia- 
ment," and  were  "  so  abominable  that  there  was 
nothing  but  '  Down  with  them ' !  "  Whether  this  was 
a  general  cry  that  rose  spontaneously  from  the  whole 
House  of  Commons  we  are  not  concerned  to  inquire. 
Latimer  seems  to  have  accepted  the  official  theory, 
and  been  willing  to  believe  without  question  a  great 
deal  of  the  vile  scandals  that  it  was  alleged  had  come 
to  light.  But  the  thing  at  which  he  was  indignant,  as 
an  honest  man  might  well  be,  was  that  the  very 
abbots  who  were  accused  of  keeping  disorderly  houses 
and  perhaps  indulging  in  gross  sins  themselves,  were 

^  Latimer's  Sermons  (Parker  Soc),  p.  123.     Cp.  pp.  117-22. 


84  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

promoted  to  bishoprics  in  order  to  save  their  pensions. 
If  the  accusations  against  them  were  true,  surely  they 
did  not  deserve  pensions  at  all,  much  less  bishoprics. 

How   much   people    in   general  believed  of  what 

the  Visitors   professed   to   have   discovered   matters 

little  to  our  purpose.     There  are  always  many  whose 

ears  are  open  to  scandal,  and  whose  judgment  is  not 

much  exercised  in  sifting  the  true  from  the  false. 

And  that  vague  scandals  were  often  repeated  about 

monastic  life  in  general  there  is  very  little  doubt. 

But  a  point  which   deserves  some  consideration  is, 

How  much  was  there  to  go  upon  in  the  way  of  tangible 

evidence,  either  substantial  or  misleading  ?     In  the 

What  was   rcigu  of  Elizabeth  it  was  plausibly  asserted  that  the 

itln  QuTen  Visitors  had  returned  "  a  book  called  the  Black  Book, 

Elizabeth's  exprcssiug  of  cvcry  such   house   the  vile  lives  and 

'^^^'         abominable  facts,  in  murders   of  their  brethren,   in 

sodomies,  in  whoredoms,  in  destroying  of  children,  in 

forginor  of  deeds  and  other   infinite    horrors  of  life, 

o       o  ...  .      . 

in  so  much  as,  dividing  of  all  the  religious  persons 
in  England  into  three  parts,  two  of  these  parts  at  the 
least  were  sodomites ;  and  this  appeared  in  writing 
with  the  names  of  the  parties  and  their  facts.  This 
was  showed  in  Parliament,  and  the  villanies  made 
known  and  abhorred."  ^ 

"  What  became  of  this  Black  Book  ? "  various 
writers  have  asked.  We  have  a  "  book,"  or  what 
would  have  been  called  a  book  in  the  sixteenth  century 
— indeed,  three  "  books,"  the  largest  of  which  extends 
to  thirty-three  pages — containing  the  record  of  what 
the  Visitors  professed  to  have  discovered  in  the 
province  of  York  and  the  two  dioceses  of  Coventry 
and  Lichfield  and  of  Norwich.  Of  this  Compendium 
Compertorum  I  have  already  spoken,  and  I  have 
no  doubt  whatever  that  this  was  "  the  Black  Book" 
the  Elizabethan  writer  had  in  view ;  but,  foul  as  it 
is,  with  a  most  unspeakable  foulness,  even  this  docu- 

^  Wright's  Suppressio7i,  114. 


CH.  11      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  85 

ment  does  not  by  any  means  justify  the  numbers 
stated  to  have  been  tainted  with  gross  impurity.  It, 
moreover,  says  nothing  about  murders  of  the  brethren, 
destroying  of  children,  or  forging  of  deeds.  In  fact, 
it  is  pretty  evident  that  these  further  accusations 
were  the  growth  of  time  and  of  old  nourished  prejudices 
after  the  monks  had  passed  away.  If  they  had  no 
opportunity  of  vindicating  themselves,  even  in  the 
days  of  Henry  VIII.  by  being  brought  face  to  face 
with  their  accusers,  they  were  still  more  defence- 
less after  they  were  dead,  in  an  age  prejudiced 
against  monasticism.  And  if  the  scandals  reported 
in  that  age  so  greatly  exceeded  what  was  written  in 
the  Comperta  themselves,  we  must  beware  of  accept- 
ing without  criticism  even  what  seems  to  rest  on 
contemporary  authority. 

That  the  Comperta  themselves  were  shown  in 
Parliament  is  not  a  necessary  inference  from  Latimer's 
words  above  quoted  ;  for  what  was  read  in  Parliament 
may  not  have  been  the  original  records.  An  official 
statement  ostensibly  founded  on  them  would  have 
answered  all  the  purpose,  and  how  far  it  went  beyond 
generalities  we  cannot  tell.  Still,  it  is  possible  enough 
that  the  Compendium  itself  may  have  been  produced 
in  Parliament  and  extracts  from  it  read.  We  have, 
however,  another  official  statement  proceeding  from 
the  King  himself,  which  seems  to  go  a  good  way 
beyond  what  we  find  in  the  Compendium  ;  for  if  we  what  the 
are  to  believe  the  King's  own  express  statement,  ^|f  sa^™' 
confessions  of  abominable  vice  were  signed  by  the 
monks  with  their  own  hands. 

To  estimate  this  evidence,  however,  we  must  note 
the  circumstances  under  which  it  was  given.  Little 
more  than  half  a  year  after  the  passing  of  the  Act 
a  formidable  rebellion  broke  out  in  Lincolnshire, 
in  which  the  insurgents  complained  chiefly  of  the 
character  of  the  King's  ministers  and  of  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  monasteries.     They  sent  up  messengers  to 


86    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  ni 

the  King  with  a  list  of  their  grievances,  and  received 
forthwith  a  lengthy  reply  carefully  composed  by  the 
King  himself,  in  a  tone  so  extraordinary  that  only  a 
considerable  extract  can  do  it  justice.  The  following 
is  the  text  of  the  passages  which  specially  relate  to 
these  subjects : — 

First,  we  begin  and  make  answer  to  the  fourth  and  sixth 
articles,  because  upon  them  dependeth  much  of  the  rest. 
Concerning  choosing  of  Counsellors,  I  never  have  read,  heard 
or  known  that  princes'  counsellors  and  prelates  should  be 
appointed  by  rude  and  ignorant  common  people,  nor  that  they 
were  persons  meet  nor  of  ability  to  discern  and  choose  meet 
and  sufficient  counsellors  for  a  prince.  How  presumptuous 
then  are  ye,  the  rude  commons  of  one  shire,  and  that  one 
of  the  most  brute  and  beastly  of  the  whole  realm,  and  of  the 
least  experience,  to  find  fault  with  your  Prince  for  the  electing 
of  his  counsellors  and  prelates,  and  to  take  upon  you,  contrary 
to  God's  law  and  man's  law,  to  rule  your  prince,  whom  ye  are 
bound  by  all  laws  to  obey  and  serve  with  both  your  lives, 
lands  and  goods,  and  for  no  worldly  cause  to  withstand ! 
The  contrary  whereof  you,  like  traitors  and  rebels,  have 
attempted,  and  not  like  true  subjects  as  ye  name  yourselves. 

As  to  the  suppression  of  religious  houses  and  monasteries, 
we  woll  that  ye  and  all  our  subjects  should  well  know  that 
this  is  granted  us  by  all  the  nobles,  spiritual  and  temporal, 
of  this  our  reahn,  and  by  all  the  Commons  in  the  same  by 
Act  of  Parliament,  and  not  set  forth  by  any  counsellor  or 
counsellors  upon  their  mere  will  and  fantasy,  as  ye  full  falsely 
would  persuade  our  realm  to  believe.  And  where  ye  allege 
that  the  service  of  God  is  much  diminished,  the  truth  thereof 
is  contrary, /or  there  he  no  houses  suppressed  where  God  was 
well  served,  hut  where  most  vice,  mischief,  and  ahomination  of 
living  was  used;  and  that  doth  well  appear  hy  their  own 
confessions  suhscrihed  with  their  own  hands  in  the  time  of  their 
visitations.  And  yet  we  suffered  a  great  many  of  them  (more 
than  we  needed  by  the  Act)  to  stand ;  wherein,  if  they  amend 
not  their  living,  we  fear  we  have  more  to  answer  for  than  for 
the  suppression  of  all  the  rest.  And  as  for  the  hospitality 
for  the  relief  of  the  poor,  we  wonder  ye  be  not  ashamed  to 
affirm  that  they  have  been  a  relief  of  poor  people,  when  a 
great  many,  or  the  most  part,  hath  not  past  four  or  five 
rehgious  persons  in  them,  and  divers  but  one,  and  which 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  87 

spent  the  substance  of  the  goods  of  their  houses  in  nourishing 
of  vice  and  abominable  living.  Now  what  unkindness  and 
unnaturality  may  we  impute  to  you  and  all  our  subjects  that 
be  of  that  mind,  that  had  liever  such  an  unthrifty  sort  of 
vicious  persons  should  enjoy  such  possessions,  profits  and 
emoluments  as  grow  of  the  said  houses,  to  the  maintenance 
of  their  unthrifty  life,  than  we,  your  natural  prince,  sovereign 
lord  and  King,  which  doth  and  hath  spent  more  in  your 
defences  of  our  own  than  six  times  they  be  worth  ? 

The  truthfulness  of  all  this  seems  to  be  on  a  par 
with  its  urbanity.  Not  a  single  house  suppressed 
where  abominable  vice  was  not  practised !  Even 
supposing  that,  against  all  reasonable  probability, 
vice  reigned  universally  in  houses  which  did  not 
possess  £200  a  year  of  revenue,  the  King's  Visitors 
had  not,  with  all  their  diligence,  traversed  more  than 
the  half  of  England,  and  that  half  very  hastily  ;  so 
there  was  no  means  of  judging  the  characters  of  half 
the  houses  suppressed.  In  fact,  the  total  number  of 
houses  actually  visited  was  not  nearly  one-third  of  all 
the  monasteries  of  England  ;  so  there  could  have  been 
no  report  at  all  against  two -thirds  of  the  houses 
suppressed.  Yet  the  King  boldly  alleges  that  not  a 
single  house  was  suppressed  which  was  not  vicious, 
and  declares  that  their  suppression  weighs  less  on  his 
mind  than  the  fact  that  he  had  spared  a  few  in  hope 
of  their  amendment;  which  he  did,  indeed,  for  pecuniary 
considerations,  though  he  did  not  say  so,  neighbours 
offering  occasionally  considerable  sums  that  useful 
monasteries  might  stand.  And  what  a  fine  touch  in 
the  end  about  the  King  having  spent  of  his  own 
money  more  than  six  times  the  value  of  those  smaller 
monasteries  in  defence  of  the  realm,  when  he  had  laid 
on  oppressive  taxes,  followed  by  a  forced  loan  of  which 
he  got  Parliament  to  relieve  him  from  repayment ! 
The  truth  is  that  there  never  was  a  time  in  his 
whole  reign  when  Henry  was  in  more  serious  danger 
from   rebellion,   and   he   was  not    at   all   scrupulous 


pression. 


88  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

about  the  means  he  used  to  tide  over  a  temporary 
difficulty. 
Defama-  The  defaming  of  the  monasteries  was  simply  a  step 

a  pretext  ^owards  their  suppression  and  the  confiscation  of  their 
for  sup-  endowments ;  and  apart  from  the  gratification  of 
avarice,  their  suppression  was  a  necessary  step  in  the 
policy  which  the  King  and  Cromwell  had  been  care- 
fully engineering.  Popular  prejudice  served  them 
well  in  some  things,  but  popular  prejudice  against 
the  monasteries  was  by  no  means  vehement.  So  far 
as  it  touched  the  religious  Orders  at  all,  it  went  against 
the  wealthy  heads  of  houses,  as  against  wealthy  lords 
in  general.  And  the  King  was  not  slow  to  avail 
himself  of  such  prejudices  when  they  could  find  a 
respectable  mouthpiece.  Such  a  mouthpiece  he  found 
at  this  time  in  Latimer,  who  had  been  made  Bishop 
of  Worcester  in  the  preceding  autumn.  It  may  almost 
seem  to  us  that  Latimer,  rising  by  Court  favour  at 
the  beginning  of  his  career,  was  a  difierent  man  from 
Latimer  denouncing  peculation  and  immoral  govern- 
ment under  King  Edward  VL  But  in  truth,  though 
the  two  sides  of  his  character  have  diff'erent  aspects, 
there  is  no  moral  incoherence  in  his  career.  He  was 
a  man  who  had  his  weaknesses  and  his  prejudices,  but 
in  the  main  was  entirely  honest.  We  must  look  at 
him,  however,  now  on  his  weak  side,  rather  too  much 
elated  by  Court  favour.  The  contemporary  letter  from 
which  an  extract  was  given  touching  the  King's  intro- 
duction of  the  bill  for  the  suppression,  was  written 
by  a  London  clergyman  named  Thomas  Dorset  to  the 
Mayor  of  Plymouth  and  three  of  his  fellow  townsmen. 
It  is  a  rather  lengthy  news-letter,  almost  entirely 
about  Church  matters,  and  at  the  beginning  relates 
to  the  examination  of  some  clergymen  at  Lambeth 
"  before  the  three  bishops  of  Canterbury,  Worcester, 
and  Salisbury "  (Cranmer,  Latimer,  and  Shaxton), 
showing  how  at  this  time  the  power  of  examining 
for  heresy  was  given  over  to  the  newly  promoted 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF   MONASTERIES  89 

dignitaries  who  upheld  royal  supremacy.  And  how 
bold  these  men  of  the  new  school  had  now  become  in 
speaking  against  the  old,  whether  clergy  or  laity, 
appears  well  by  the  paragraph  immediately  preceding 
that  which  we  have  already  extracted  : — 

On  Sunday  last  the  Bishop  of  Worcester  preached  at  Latimer's 
Paul's  Cross,  and  he  said  that  bishops,  abbots,  priors,  parsons,  ^^"■'^e  of 
canons  resident,  priests  and  all  were  strong  thieves — yea,  *^^^  cierRv^ 
dukes,  lords  and  all.  The  King,  quod  he,  made  a  marvellous 
good  Act  of  Parliament  that  certain  men  should  sow  every 
of  them  two  acres  of  hemp ;  but  it  were  all  too  little,  were  it 
so  much  more,  to  hang  the  thieves  that  be  in  England. 
Bishops,  Abbots,  with  such  other,  should  not  have  so  many 
servants,  nor  so  many  dishes,  but  to  go  to  their  first  founda- 
tion, and  keep  hospitality  to  feed  the  needy  people, — not 
jolly  fellows  with  golden  chains  and  velvet  gowns,  ne  let 
them  not  once  come  into  the  houses  of  religion  for  repast. 
Let  them  call.  Knave  Bishop,  Knave  Abbot,  Knave  Prior, 
yet  feed  none  of  them  all,  nor  their  horses,  nor  their  dogs. 
.  .  .  The  Bishop  of  Canterbury  saith  that  the  King's  Grace 
is  at  a  full  point  for  friars  and  chauntry  priests,  that  they 
shall  away  all  that,  saving  those  that  can  preach.  Then  one 
said  to  the  Bishop  that  they  had  good  trust  that  they  should 
serve  forth  their  life  times,  and  he  said  they  should  serve  it 
out  at  a  cart  then,  for  any  other  service  they  should  have  by 
that. 

That  a  revolution  was  to  be  made  in  religious 
matters  by  strong  coercion  was  perfectly  evident ;  and 
this  process  naturally  had  the  approval  of  Cranmer, 
Latimer,  and  Shaxton,  who  had  all  three  been  made 
bishops  for  the  express  purpose  of  supporting  the 
new  style  of  spiritual  government.  Of  the  three,  it 
would  seem  that  Latimer  devoted  his  energies  to  it 
with  the  least  misgivings.  Honest  as  he  undoubtedly 
was  throughout  his  career,  he  cannot  be  classed 
among  those  clear-sighted  and  incorruptible  heroes 
who  discern  sources  of  mischief  before  they  come  to 
maturity,  and  set  themselves  to  oppose  moral  and 
social  danger  before  it  becomes  widespread.  A  man 
of  old-fashioned  ideas  generally,  a  popular  preacher 


90    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

who  set  forth  morality  with  merry  stories,  no  one 
would  ever  have  thought  of  calling  him  a  great 
divine,  and  the  last  thing  he  was  likely  to  do  was 
to  take  a  leading  part  in  a  religious  revolution.  Nor, 
in  truth,  did  he  take  the  lead ;  he  simply  followed  a 
course  marked  out  for  him.  He  beheved  in  the 
ability  and  clear-sightedness  of  the  King  and  Crom- 
well ;  his  devotion  to  his  sovereign  saw  no  clear 
line  of  limitation ;  and  he  was  rather  intoxicated  to 
find  important  functions  given  him,  to  which  he 
could  hardly  have  aspired  when  he  was  first  pre- 
sented to  the  benefice  of  West  Kington  in  Wiltshire 
"  by  the  King  at  the  suit  of  Cromwell  and  Dr. 
Buttes "  more  than  four  years  before  he  was  made 
a  bishop.  Invited  to  preach  before  the  King  and  in 
London  about  that  time,  he  was  delated  for  heresy 
and  protected  by  courtiers ;  yet  he  was  obliged,  in 
spite  of  favour,  to  make  his  submission  to  Convoca- 
tion. Now,  however,  he  had  his  revenge,  and  was 
more  free  with  his  tongue. 

In  June  a  new  Parliament  met,  and  Convocation, 
as  usual,  met  at  the  same  time.  The  last  Convoca- 
tion had  experienced  cruelty  and  suffering  enough  at 
the  King's  hands.  It  had  been  forced  to  make  an 
enormous  contribution,  which  was  accepted  only  as 
a  fine  to  expiate  the  grievous  sin  of  the  clergy  in 
acknowledging  Wolsey's  legateship,  and  it  had  been 
driven  to  that  qualified  acknowledgment  of  the  King's 
supremacy,  which,  as  has  been  sufficiently  shown,  was 
interpreted  by  Parliament  as  unqualified,  and  enforced 
by  a  cruel  statute,  followed  by  merciless  and  unjust 
executions.  Now  the  subjection  of  the  clergy  was 
to  be  further  exemplified.  Cromwell  presided  in 
Convocation  as  the  King's  Vicegerent — nay,  even 
Cromwell's  deputy  in  his  absence,  —  and  Cranmer 
He  appointed  Latimer  to  preach  before  the  assembled 

preaches     diviucs,  giving  him  thereby  an  opportunity  to  pay 
vocation,     off"   old    scores   agaiust   them.       In   the   two   Latin 


cH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  91 

sermons  which  he  then  delivered  he  certainly  did  not 
spare  them.  Without  calling  them  to  their  faces 
"  strong  thieves,"  as  he  had  done  at  Paul's  Cross,  he 
asked  what  one  good  thing  they  had  done  for  seven 
years  past.  They  had  burned  a  dead  man  and  tried 
to  burn  a  living  one.  They  had  been  compelled 
against  their  will  to  allow  the  circulation  of  good 
books.  It  was  the  King  who  had  done  some  good 
by  admonishing  them  to  preach  oftener ;  and  it  was 
time  now  to  reform  spiritual  abuses,  for  the  number 
of  holy  days  was  excessive,  and  images,  pilgrimages, 
and  relics  served  but  to  encourage  superstition.  He 
also  glanced  at  Purgatory  as  a  fiery  furnace  that 
burned  away  people's  pence.  Thus  the  lines  of  a 
new  Church  policy  were  indicated.  But  Convoca- 
tion, however  ineffective  its  voice  might  now  be, 
endeavoured  to  take  a  way  of  its  own,  and  still 
showed  considerable  independence  of  spirit  in  de- 
nouncing what  it  considered  popular  errors  and 
heretical  outcries,  some  of  which  Latimer's  sermon 
distinctly  favoured. 

To  return,  however,  to  the  subject  of  the  monas- 
teries. On  the  24th  April,  more  than  a  month 
after  the  passing  of  the  Act  for  the  suppression  of 
the  smaller  houses,  commissions  were  sent  out  to 
a  number  of  gentlemen  in  each  of  the  counties  to 
take  certain  preliminary  steps  towards  putting  it  in 
force.  Certain  special  oflScers,  viz.  an  auditor,  a 
particular  receiver,  a  clerk  of  the  register  of  the  late 
visitation,  and  three  other  discreet  persons  to  be 
named  by  the  King  in  every  county,  were  to  visit  the 
different  houses,  show  their  commission,  and  declare 
to  the  governors  the  statute  of  dissolution.  They 
were  then  to  swear  the  governors  and  officers  of  each 
house  to  make  declaration, — first,  of  the  Order  to 
which  the  house  belonged,  and  whether  it  was  a  cell 
(for  cells  of  great  monasteries  were  to  be  spared), 
and,  if  so,  they  were  to  deliver  a  privy  seal  to  the 


92    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

governor  to  appear  before  the  Chancellor  and  Council 
of  the  newly  constituted  Court  of  the  Augmentations  ; 
secondly,  what  number  of  religious  were  in  it,  "  and 
the  conversation  of  their  lives,"  how  many  were 
priests,  and  how  many  were  willing  to  go  to  other 
houses,  or  take  capacities,  and  also  how  many  ser- 
vants or  other  dependents  belonged  to  the  house  ; 
thirdly,  they  were  to  value  the  lead  and  the  bells ; 
fourthly,  to  call  for  the  convent  seal  and  muniments, 
make  an  inventory  by  indenture  with  the  governor 
of  all  the  ornaments,  plate,  jewels,  household  stuff, 
farm  stock,  and  so  forth,  with  the  debts  owing  by 
and  to  them.  Then,  after  some  necessary  injunc- 
tions, they  were  to  survey  the  demesnes,  and  certify 
the  clear  yearly  value,  and  what  woods,  parks,  forests, 
and  commons  belonged  to  each  house.  ^ 
The  "new  The  rctums  made  of  this  "  new  survey,"  as  it  was 
the^monas-  Called,  for  scvcral  counties  are  extant ;  and  it  is  not 
teries.  a  little  siugular  that  the  characters  given  of  the 
monks  by  these  royal  commissioners  are  almost 
uniformly  good.  Occasionally,  the  inmates  of  some 
of  the  most  defamed  monasteries  in  Legh  and 
Layton's  Comperta — as  in  the  cases  of  the  monks  of 
Garadon  and  the  nuns  of  Gracedieu  in  Leicestershire, 
were  reported  to  be  all  of  good  conversation.  In 
neither  of  these  two  houses,  moreover,  was  there  a 
monk  or  nun  who  desired  to  leave — a  fact  which 
enhances  the  credit  of  the  later  report.  At  Coxford, 
in  Norfolk,  where,  according  to  the  Visitors,  one 
William  Nevell  confessed  impurity,  the  commis- 
sioners found  that  there  were  only  three  monks,  all 
priests  of  good  name,  who,  however,  desired  dispen- 
sations to  leave.  At  Bromholm,  where  the  Visitors 
had  found  the  prior  and  three  monks  (who,  in  fact, 
were  all  the  house)  impure,  the  commissioners  found 
them  all  "  of  very  good  name  and  fame."  Moreover, 
at  the  nunnery  of  Crabhouse  above  mentioned,  which 

'  L.  P.,  X.  721. 


cH.ii      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  93 

had  only  four  inmates,  all  of  whom,  according  to  the 
Visitors,  had  had  children,  the  report  of  the  com- 
missioners was  of  all  four,  that  "  their  name  is  good, 
as  is  commonly  reported,"  On  this,  however,  it  must 
be  remarked  that  another  hand  has  written  at  the 
top,  "Their  name  is  not  good."  ^  In  this  particular 
case,  apparently,  the  first  report  of  the  commis- 
sioners was  made  without  sufficient  inquiry. 

But,  on  the  whole,  it  will  surely  be  admitted  that 
no  reliance  whatever  is  to  be  placed  on  the  foul 
reports  of  the  Visitors,  which  were  clearly  intended 
for  no  other  purpose  than  to  afford  a  pretext  for  the 
parliamentary  suppression  of  the  smaller  monasteries. 
It  is  further  evident  that  that  measure  was  exceed- 
ingly unpopular  and  one  of  the  main  causes  of  the 
two,  or  rather  three,  successive  rebellions  which  broke 
out  in  Lincolnshire,  Yorkshire,  and  the  North  of 
England  between  the  beginning  of  October  1536  and 
the  middle  of  February  following.  For  more  than 
four  months  there  were  intermittent  outbreaks,  at 
times  quieted  by  false  assurances,  soon  after  per- 
fidiously violated, — outbreaks  punished  with  a  brutal, 
unsparing  severity  which  left  very  little  heart  in 
the  people  for  renewed  disturbances.  So  the  mon-  Destruc- 
astic  system  in  England  was  broken  down  and  the  )i°ua°tkf^ 
unpopular  legislation  was  carried  into  effect.  The  system. 
pretence  that  no  further  suppression  was  contem- 
plated than  that  of  the  smaller  monasteries  did  not 
endure  two  years.  Strong  intercession,  indeed,  was 
made  for  many  of  the  smaller  monasteries,  and,  as 
I  have  already  said,  considerable  sums  were  paid 
to  the  Exchequer  that  they  might  be  spared,  for 
there  was  a  special  provision  in  the  Act  allowing 
the  King  to  spare  those  he  thought  fit.  But  after 
a  brief  respite  there  began  a  process  of  surrenders, 
even  of  the  larger  monasteries,  which  one  by  one  fell 
into  the  King's  hands  also,  till  finally  the  abbots  of 

^  Gasquet's  Overlooked  Testimonies.     See  Dublin  Review,  April  1894. 


94  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

three  great  houses  who  were  not  inclined  to  follow 
suit,  were  accused  of  treason,  as  a  few  other  abbots 
had  already  been  before  them,  with  the  result,  which, 
as  contemporary  memoranda  show,  was  fully  deter- 
mined on  before  their  trial,  that  they  were  found 
guilty  and  hanged.  The  houses  themselves,  in  all 
such  cases,  were,  by  an  arbitrary  stretch  of  the  law, 
confiscated  on  account  of  the  attainder  of  their 
heads, — just  as  part  of  the  property  of  the  See  of 
York  had  been  confiscated  on  the  fall  of  Wolsey. 

Note. — That  the  tradition  recorded  by  Sir  Henry  Spelman 
of  the  King's  arbitrary  conduct  towards  Parliament  is  by  no 
means  improbable  we  may  judge,  not  only  by  the  fact  that 
the  parliamentary  suppression  was  one  great  cause  of  the 
Northern  rebelHons,  but  also  by  the  unpopularity  of  the  far 
less  extensive  suppression  of  small  monasteries  effected  by 
"Wolsey,  notwithstanding  that  he  did  it  at  great  personal 
cost  to  himself  under  the  authority  of  papal  bulls  and  royal 
licences,  and  the  object  was  to  apply  the  revenues  to  the 
foundation  of  two  colleges  for  the  education  of  youth,  the 
one  at  Oxford  and  the  other  at  his  native  town  of  Ipswich. 
In  Roy's  bitter  satire  against  Wolsey,  "  Rede  me  and  be  not 
wrothe,"  we  meet  with  the  following  passage : — 

I  am  sure  thou  has  hearde  spoken 
What  monasteries  he  hath  broken 

With  out  their  fownders  consentis. 
He  subverteth  churches  and  chappells, 
Takynge  a  waye  bokis  and  bells 

With  chalesces  and  vestmentis. 
He  plucketh  downe  the  costly  leades 
That  it  maye  rayne  on  saynctis  heades, 

Not  sparynge  God  nor  oure  Ladye. 
Where  as  they  red  servyce  divyne 
There  is  grountynge  of  pigges  and  swyne, 

With  lowynge  of  oxen  and  kye. 
The  aultres  of  their  celebracions 
Are  made  pearches  for  henns  and  capons, 

De  foylynge  them  with  their  durt. 
And  though  it  be  never  so  prophane, 
He  is  counted  a  good  christiane, 

No  man  doynge  hym  eny  hurtt.^ 

^  See  Arber's  reprint  of  the  ballad,  p.  113. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  95 

The  whole  number  of  monasteries  suppressed  by  Wolsey 
was  twenty -nine.  Those  suppressed  by  Parliament,  even 
deducting  those  which  had  special  licences  to  continue,  were 
two  hundred  and  fifty-eight. 


APPENDIX  TO  CHAPTER  II 

The  real  condition  of  the  monasteries  as  regards  purity 
has  of  late  become  a  question  of  much  discussion ;  but  exact 
evidence  is  clearly  impossible  to  attain,  and  the  accuracy  of 
any  general  estimate  will  always  no  doubt  be  impugned, 
more  or  less  from  a  -priori  impressions.  Scandalmongers 
were  far  more  outspoken  in  those  days  than  they  would 
have  been  if  controlled  by  a  law  of  libel,  and  the  social  life 
of  England  as  a  whole  was  probably  no  better  than  that  of 
other  countries.  Domestic  feeling  was  killed  by  feudalism. 
The  ties  of  marriage  were  little  regarded  in  high  life ;  the 
middle  classes  were  corrupted  by  their  superiors,  and  many 
of  the  secular  clergy,  bound  to  celibacy,  formed  uncanonical 
unions  with  women,  or  even  lived  in  sinful  relations  with 
married  women  deserted  by  their  husbands.  That  vice 
should  be  so  prevalent  in  the  world,  and  not  find  its  way 
into  the  monasteries — harbours  of  refuge  though  these  might 
be  considered — was  hardly  to  be  expected;  and  we  know 
that  it  was  by  no  means  completely  excluded.  But  a  more 
sober  estimate  of  the  degree  to  which  it  actually  prevailed 
there  may  be  found  by  comparing,  where  it  is  possible  to  do 
so,  the  com'perta  of  the  Royal  Visitors  of  1536  with  the  results 
of  episcopal  visitations  not  many  years  before. 

This  is  possible,  at  least,  in  some  houses  in  the  diocese  of  Results  of 
Norwich,  and  we  have  already  made  the  comparison  in  the  ^.®.?'°y'''^ 
case  of  Crabhouse  in  Wiggenhall.     But  before  proceeding  to  jn  Norwich 
a  more  extended  comparison,  it  should  be  observed  that  the  diocese 
object  of  these  episcopal  visitations  was  not,  generally  speak-  compared 
ing,  merely  to  correct  immorality.    It  was  to  correct  anything  copai*^^  ^' 
whatever  that  was  wrong — whether  chanting  in  the  choir  visitations 
was  too  quick  or  the  tiling  of  an  outhouse  was  in  decay ;  to  ^^fo''^  i*'— 
hear  complaints,  even  against  heads  of  monasteries,  whether 
an  abbot  or  prior  was  too  severe,  or  whether  a  lazy  monk 
shammed  illness  and  lay  too  long  abed  in  the  morning ;  for 
good  monks  got  up  in  the  night  to  go  to  lauds.     Quarrels,  of 
course,  come  out  in  evidence  occasionally,  and  as  to  more 


g6    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


at  Hick- 
lino;. 


Thetford, 


Wymond- 
ham. 


serious  things  they  could  not  well  be  kept  out  of  sight. 
Consequently  they  do  appear  sometimes,  but  certainly 
nothing  like  so  frequently  as  they  do  in  the  reports  of  the 
King's  Visitors. 

For  example,  those  Visitors  at  Hickling  found  six  monks 
unchaste,  and  three  of  them  with  women.  We  have  the 
records  of  four  episcopal  visitations  from  1492  to  1532,  and 
various  complaints  are  made  at  three  of  them,  as,  that 
servants  are  ill  paid,  lights  not  kept  up,  and  that  there  is  no 
schoolmaster;  but  not  a  word  about  unchastity.  In  1520 
nothing  is  reported  amiss  at  all.  In  1532  the  chief  thing  to 
be  looked  to  in  that  lonely  country  seems  to  be  danger  from 
ill  neighbours,  and  the  bishop  orders  clubs  to  be  provided 
for  the  defence  of  the  priory !  At  Thetford  (a  place  of  old 
renown,  once  the  East  Anglian  bishop's  see)  there  was  a 
priory  and  a  nunnery  also,  both  in  great  decay  and  very 
poor.  But  out  of  four  visitations  the  only  hint  of  unchastity 
is  in  1514,  when  the  prior  is  suspected  with  the  wife  of 
Stephen  Horham.  In  the  others  there  were  either  no 
complaints  or  very  trivial.  In  1536,  however,  the  King's 
Visitors  not  only  found  that  one  canon  confessed  theft  and 
one  impurity,  but  among  the  nuns  they  alleged  that  one 
had  confessed  incontinence.  They  suspected,  however,  that 
the  canons  were  confederated  as  there  were  seventeen  of 
them  !  But  this  statement,  even  as  to  the  number,  seems  not 
a  little  doubtful ;  for  the  priory,  which  was  found  to  be  in 
decay  in  1514  and  1520,  consisted  in  1532  only  of  the  prior 
and  three  canons  with  three  novices.  And  even  in  1534 
when  the  brethren  acknowledged  the  King's  supremacy 
they  numbered  only  seven,  including  the  prior.  ^  The  report 
of  the  Visitors,  however,  was  written  only  for  the  King's 
information. 

At  Wymondham,  indeed,  we  find  a  house  which  seems  to 
have  been  always  more  or  less  unruly.  In  1492  it  was 
found,  among  other  things,  that  divine  offices  were  celebrated 
morose — in  a  grumbling  sort  of  a  way ;  that  monks  bought 
and  sold  like  merchants ;  that  they  did  not  study,  but  hunted 
with  hounds  and  hawks,  and  left  the  cloister  without  the 
abbot's  leave  for  their  own  amusement.  The  rules  of  the  Bene- 
dictine Order  were  not  kept,  and  the  walls  of  the  monastic 
enclosure  were  not  in  good  repair.  The  abbot,  John 
Kyrtelyng  (an  old  man,  doubtless,  for  he  had  been  abbot 


^  Rymer,  xiv.  514-15. 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES  97 

one-and-twenty  years)/  was  compelled  to  hand  over  the 
administration  to  William  Batell,  with  whom  he  made  an 
agreement  for  a  pension,  a  mansion-house  to  live  in,  and 
various  allowances  from  the  monastery,  which  certainly 
ought  to  have  made  him  very  comfortable.  In  1514  the 
abbot's  name  was  Thomas  Chamberlen.  He  complained 
that  some  of  the  monks  broke  the  keys  of  the  cloister — he 
could  not  tell  who  the  offenders  were ;  that  William  Bury 
the  prior,  with  some  of  the  other  monks,  broke  up  a  chest 
and  carried  off  evidences  of  the  house  without  his  leave ; 
that  the  same  prior  plucked  a  dish  from  a  servant  and  dis- 
posed of  it  ad  libitum.  Prior  Bury,  however,  had  his  own 
complaint  against  the  abbot,  who  kept  the  offices  of  cellarer 
and  sacrist  in  his  hands,  giving  the  poor  monks  not  enough 
to  eat  and  drink ;  that  the  abbot  did  not  pay  the  "  Juste 
money  " ;  and  that  a  number  of  other  things  were  unsatis- 
factory. One  monk  on  the  Eve  of  St.  John  Baptist  had 
declared  that  a  man  would  not  rise  with  body  and  soul  on 
the  Day  of  Judgment.  Others  wore  shirts  and  long  boots. 
One  Hengham  was  suspected  with  Agnes  Hoberd.  The 
daughters  of  a  certain  widow  came  suspiciously  to  the 
chamberlain's  room.  The  precentor  took  away  books  to  the 
injury  of  St.  Mary's  mass,  etc.  But  Dan  John  Harleston 
gives  a  very  unfavourable  character  of  Prior  Bury  and  says 
he  is  a  malicious  man.  He  drew  a  sword  last  Lent  on  Dan 
Richard  Cambridge  and  would  have  killed  him  if  Harleston 
had  not  stopped  him.  He  maliciously  broke  the  clarichord 
of  Dan  John  Hengham,  and  would  have  hit  him  with  a 
stone  in  the  abbot's  presence ;  and  so  on.  The  depositions 
testify  general  disorder ;  and  Prior  Bury,  when  Dan  Richard 
Cambridge  threatened  to  report  him  to  the  bishop,  not  only 
for  the  attempt  against  himself  with  the  sword  but  for  other 
irregularities,  answered  contemptuously,  "  Tell  my  lord  and 
my  lady  both,  for  I  care  not."  This  seems  to  suggest  that 
the  bishop  himself  had  a  "  lady,"  which,  indeed,  I  cannot  quite 
disprove.  The  notice  of  Bishop  Nix  in  Godwin's  Bishops  is  not 
favourable  to  his  character,  but  on  what  evidences  it  was 
based  is  not  clear.  At  this  time,  however.  Bishop  Nix  must 
have  been  nearer  seventy  than  sixty  years  old,  and  if  he 
required  a  "  lady,"  it  was  probably  as  a  nurse  rather  than  in 
any  other  capacity.  In  1520  matters  at  Wymondham  were 
not  very  much   better,  and   Dan   Richard   Cambridge   was 

^  Dugdale,  iii.  327. 
VOL.  II  H 


98  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

reported  as  given  to  drink.  But  some  improvement  had 
begun,  the  abbot  being  John  Holt,  titular  Bishop  of  Lydda, 
a  learned  man  and  friend  of  Sir  Thomas  More.  And  in 
1526  this  improvement  seems  to  have  been  maintained. 
Prior  Bury,  indeed,  still  remained,  and,  curiously,  no  one 
complained  of  him  this  time ;  but  the  abbot,  William 
Castilten,  seems  to  have  been  a  capable  man,  and  four  of 
his  monks  report  that  he  corrects  everything  and  all  is  well. 
He  and  the  cellarer,  Thomas  Thaxsted,  however,  say  that 
Thomas  Osmund  is  a  getter-up  of  quarrels  between  him  and 
the  brethren.  In  1536  the  Royal  Visitors  here  found  four 
cases  of  impurity  among  the  professed.  There  were  eleven 
monks  including  the  abbot  in  1534.^ 
Previous  The  previous  history  of  this  abbey,  we  may  observe,  was 
w  m'cfncf  ^  ^^^^^®  peculiar.  Till  the  year  1448  it  had  been  a  cell  of  the 
ham?"'^''  great  abbey  of  St.  Albans,  the  abbot  of  which,  by  name 
John  Stoke,  caused  one  of  his  monks,  Stephen  London,  with 
whom  he  had  personal  disagreements,  to  be  made  prior 
there.  But  this  Stephen  became  so  popular  both  with  his 
brethren  and  with  Sir  Andrew  Ogard,  "his  founder,"  that 
Abbot  Stoke's  jealousy  was  roused  and  he  endeavoured  to 
remove  him.  The  prior  and  Sir  Andrew,  however,  success- 
fully petitioned  the  King  for  leave  to  obtain  a  bull  from  the 
Pope  to  erect  Wymondham  into  an  abbey ;  which  was  done, 
and  Stephen  London  became  the  first  abbot.^  He  certainly 
was  one  who  could  speak  his  mind  very  decidedly,  as  a  letter 
of  his  to  Abbot  Stoke  bears  witness;  and  I  suspect  Abbot 
Stoke  deserved  every  word  of  the  strong  rebuke  he  gave 
him.  Stephen  London  was  evidently  a  good  and  capable 
ruler;  but  the  same  could  not  be  said  of  his  successors  a 
little  later.  Things  do  not  seem  to  have  been  improving, 
even  inside  monasteries,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  fifteenth 
century. 

At  St.  Albans  itself  in  the  end  they  became  far  worse. 
John  Stoke  had  succeeded  a  really  great  abbot,  Whetham- 
stede,who  resigned  after  twenty  years' rule,  overburdened  with 
anxieties.  After  Stoke's  death  Whethamstede  was  elected 
again,  and  he  at  once  instituted  a  register  of  things  done  in 
the  abbey,  and  thereby  became  an  historian  of  the  civil  war, 
of  which  St.  Albans  itself  witnessed  the  first  conflict.  After 
Whethamstede's  day  order  seems  to  have  been  maintained 
fairly  well  under  two  different  abbots,  the  second  of  whom, 

1  L.  P.,  VII.  1121  (61)  ;  X.  364. 
\.Dugdale,  iii.  326  ;  Amundesbam,  ii.  366  (Rolls  Series). 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION   OF  MONASTERIES  99 

Wallingford,  set  up  a  printing  press  in  the  abbey.  But 
under  his  unnamed  successor  arose  those  fearful  scandals 
which  called  for  the  interference  of  Archbishop  Morton  at 
the  beginning  of  Henry  VII.'s  reign,  when  this,  the  oldest  of 
Benedictine  abbeys  in  England,  infected  two  neighbouring 
nunneries  with  its  own  impurities.^ 

Now  let  us  look  at  a  nunnery.  At  Blackborough  the  Black- 
Royal  Visitors  in  1536  found  the  prioress  and  two  others  ^o^o'^g^- 
"  suspected  "  of  incontinence.  What  was  the  previous  record 
of  this  house?  In  1514  the  prioress,  whose  name  is  not 
given,  said  she  had  nothing  to  report.  Dame  Margaret 
Gigges  said  all  things  were  well,  both  as  to  services  and 
repairs,  though  it  was  true  the  prioress  did  not  render  any 
accounts,  to  save  the  expense  of  an  auditor,  but  only  (as 
another  sister  observes)  reported  verbally  the  state  of  the 
house  to  the  sisters.  Others  agreed  generally  that  things 
were  well;  but  Margaret  Hollins,  who  was  president  and 
sacrist,  considered  that  the  buildings  of  the  church  and 
cloister  required  repair;  while  Agnes  Grey  said  that  they 
did  not  keep  up  the  number  of  sisters  required  by  their 
founder ;  they  were  in  debt,  and  had  not  had  a  sub-prioress 
for  four  years.  In  1520  all  was  reported  well  and  an 
inventory  exhibited.  In  1532  Elizabeth  Dawny,  the  prioress 
(the  same  whom  the  Royal  Visitors  "  suspected  "  of  incontin- 
ence four  years  later),  said  all  was  going  on  as  well  as  the 
resources  of  the  house  permitted ;  but  Margaret  Gigges,  who 
by  this  time  had  been  made  sub-prioress,  said  the  church 
was  ruinous  with  age  and  they  could  not  afford  workmen  to 
rebuild  it.  No  unfavourable  criticisms  were  elicited  from  any 
one  of  the  eleven  sisters  examined  ;  but  one  replied  in  answer 
to  a  question  that  a  Black  Friar  of  Lynn  came  to  confess  them. 
Such  is  the  substance  of  three  visitations  of  a  house  that  was 
clearly  decaying  as  regards  the  means  of  keeping  it  up.  But 
do  these  reports  convey  any  idea  that  it  was  governed  by  an 
immoral  prioress  or  that  it  was  at  all  likely  to  harbour 
immorality  ? 

Again,  let  us  take  another  kind  of  community,  consisting  Coxfoid. 
neither  of  monks  nor  nuns,  but  of  canons.  At  Coxford 
Priory  the  Royal  Visitors  in  1536  found  that  one  canon, 
William  Nevill,  confessed  impurities.  Here,  perhaps,  we 
may  suspect  that  the  confession  was  genuine ;  but  it  is  worth 
while  looking  at  the  previous  history  of  the  house.      There 

1  See  Vol.  I.  pp.  269  sq. 


lOO  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

seems  to  have  been  a  struggle  to  keep  it  up.  In  1492 
there  were  a  prior  and  seven  canons,  and  the  visitor,  Arch- 
deacon Gold  well,  commissary  of  the  Bishop  of  Norwich, 
found  first  that  the  infirmary  was  not  open  for  the  use  of 
the  sick,  and  the  refectory  was  too  cold  for  the  canons  to 
dine  in  comfort ;  that  it  would  be  advisable  to  have  a  teacher 
of  grammar  for  the  juniors ;  and  that  the  brethren  had  not 
fitting  recreations.  That  was  all.  In  1514  things  were 
certainly  going  wrong.  John  Mathew,  the  prior,  said  the 
morning  mass  was  not  celebrated;  the  brethren  were  dis- 
obedient, quarrelsome,  and  incorrigible;  Dan  John  Berdon 
had  three  or  four  times  taken  flight  and  was  now  incar- 
cerated. Dan  John  Nightingale,  the  sub-prior,  said  that 
silence  was  not  observed,  that  the  prior  did  not  render 
accounts  yearly,  that  the  refectory  was  in  decay,  and  they 
had  no  infirmary — complaints  repeated  by  another  canon. 
Dan  John  Froste,  however,  said  all  was  well,  and  so  said 
Thomas  Birde  and  three  others ;  while  Richard  Andrew 
stated  that  the  prior  did  not  rise  in  the  night-time  except  at 
the  four  principal  feasts.  The  Bishop  on  this  gave  injunc- 
tions with  a  view  to  better  management.  In  1520  there  was 
a  marked  improvement.  The  establishment  seems  to  have 
consisted  at  that  date  of  the  prior,  John  Mathew,  the  sub- 
prior,  John  Nightingale,  five  canons,  and  three  professi  not 
even  in  minor  orders.  The  prior  complained  about  an 
annuity  given  by  the  house  to  one  Nicholas  Hare,  who  did 
not  discharge  the  office  for  which  it  was  given.  The  sub- 
prior  said  that  a  yearly  account  of  the  state  of  the  house 
was  not  rendered,  but  all  else  was  well ;  and  each  of  the 
canons,  examined  separately,  agreed  that  all  duties  were 
done  truly,  both  in  temporal  and  in  spiritual  things,  and 
that  the  prior  was  very  attentive  to  the  weal  of  the  house. 
In  1526  John  Mathew  is  still  prior,  and  admits  that  an 
account  is  not  rendered  yearly  of  the  state  of  the  house ;  his 
sub-prior.  Nightingale,  adds  that  to  his  knowledge  it  has  not 
been  usual  to  do  so  for  forty  years.  Two  priests  and  one 
deacon,  who  seem  to  be  all  the  remaining  canons,  say  that  all 
things  are  going  on  well.  But  in  1532  a  scandal  is  for  the 
first  time  revealed.  Prior  Mathew  and  another  prior,  Mr. 
Rawlens,  have  passed  away,  and  now  the  prior  is  Henry 
Salter,  who  has  not  been  a  year  in  office,  but  promises  to 
render  an  account  by  the  end  of  the  year.  He  says,  how- 
ever, that  Dan  Robert  Porter  had  a  child  with  which  the 
house  is  burdened,  and  that  he  was  corrected  for  this  by 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES        loi 

Prior  Rawlens — statements  which  are  confirmed  by  Dan 
John  Graye.  The  sub-prior,  however,  Dan  William  Nevell, 
simply  says  that  all  things  are  done  well  juxta  facultates, 
with  which  John  Graye  agrees  also,  and  the  guilty  Robert 
Porter  and  two  novices  say  the  same. 

That  is  the  last  episcopal  visitation,  and  it  is  remarkable 
that  the  Royal  Visitors  four  years  later  are  silent  about 
Robert  Porter's  misconduct,  but  find  that  William  ISTevell 
has  confessed  unchastity ;  which  may,  no  doubt,  be  true,  or 
it  may  be  (just  as  likely)  that  the  Royal  Visitors  in  their 
hasty  visitation,  confused  the  names  of  Nevell  and  Porter — 
accuser  and  accused. 

Again,  let  us  look  at  the  story  of  Buckenham  Priory,  Bucken- 
where  in  1492  were  a  prior  and  seven  canons.  By  the  ^^°^- 
visitation  of  that  date  it  appears,  first,  that  the  prior  did  not 
show  a  yearly  account  as  he  ought  to  do  (this,  it  will  be 
observed,  was  a  very  common  neglect,  condoned  in  many 
houses  by  the  brethren) ;  then,  that  there  was  not  perfect 
charity  among  the  brethren,  that  they  had  not  a  good  supply 
of  fish  on  fast  days,  and  that  the  prior  was  not  impartial. 
In  serious  matters  he  did  not  take  counsel  but  did  everything 
after  his  own  mind.  He  had  pawned  a  gilt  cup  worth  eight 
marks.  If  a  brother  was  sick  he  got  no  one  to  tend  him  in 
the  infirmary.  He  had  leased  the  dairy  to  the  detriment  of 
the  house.  The  brethren  did  not  keep  the  refectory  except 
in  Lent  and  Advent.  The  victuals  in  the  kitchen  were  not 
good.  The  house  and  walls  of  the  priory  were  decayed. 
Finally,  one  Isabella  Warner  came  suspiciously  often  to  the 
priory,  and  something  was  suspected  between  her  and  the 
sub-prior,  Thomas  Beverley.  The  bishop  "  continued  " — that 
is  to  say  adjourned — this  visitation,  first  till  the  following 
Wednesday  (it  was  in  October),  and  then  till  the  9th  July 
next  after,  which  would  be  the  following  year ;  but  whether 
he  gave  any  injunctions  even  then  does  not  appear.  In  1514 
the  prior,  John  Milgate,  and  the  sub-prior,  Thomas  Beverley, 
complain  of  certain  disobedient  canons,  and  others  report 
slight  irregularities,  while  three  say  that  all  is  well.  In 
1520,  except  that  one  canon  did  not  appear  and  was  pro- 
nounced contumacious,  all  seems  to  have  been  going  on  well. 
By  the  bishop's  leave  the  neighbouring  parish  churches  of 
St.  Benet,  Old  Buckenham,  and  St.  Andrew  were  served  by 
the  brethren.  In  1526  Milgate  is  still  prior,  as,  indeed,  he 
was  to  the  last,  and  all  is  reported  well  by  everybody,  except 
some  misconduct  on  the  part  of  a  servant,  and  a  complaint 


102  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

by  the  novices  of  the  smallness  of  their  stipends.  In  1532 
all  is  found  well  except  that  some  of  the  young  canons  leave 
the  cloister  after  complines.  Some  wear  shoes  "  with  horns," 
and  a  canon  who  serves  the  cure  of  Stamford  is  declared  by 
one  of  the  brethren  to  be  unfit.  The  bishop's  injunctions  are 
that  the  canons  shall  retire  to  the  dormitory  at  once  after 
complines,  and  not  leave  it  without  licence.  The  south  doors 
are  to  be  shut.  No  canon  is  to  wear  "  lascivious  "  shoes,  and 
none  is  to  serve  a  secular  cure  without  the  bishop's  licence. 
Not  one  of  the  last  three  episcopal  visitations  shows  anything 
worse  than  this  little  dangerous  tendency  of  canons  to  imitate 
the  fashions  of  the  day  with  "  lascivious  "  shoes.  But  four 
years  later  the  Eoyal  Visitors  find  Prior  Milgate  himself 
incontinent  with  a  single  woman  and  two  of  the  canons 
unchaste  in  another  way.  If  these  accusations  were  just, 
it  seems  a  little  strange  that  Prior  Milgate's  frailty  was 
never  discovered  in  any  of  the  previous  two-and-twenty 
years. 

It  is  true,  the  monasteries  we  have  been  considering  were 
chiefly  in  country  districts — even  Wymondham  could  hardly 
have  had  much  of  a  town  about  it.  But  Norwich  was  a 
kind  of  metropolis  of  the  Eastern  Counties,  a  busy  populous 
city,  the  attractions  and  excitements  of  which  had  un- 
Norwich  doubtcdly  their  influence  upon  the  inmates  of  the  Cathedral 
Cathedral  priory ;  and  it  is  certainly  of  some  interest  to  know  how  far 
priory.  -^j^^  report  of  the  Eoyal  Visitors  here  is  likely  to  have  been 
justified.  Now  it  may  be  supposed  that  a  cathedral  priory, 
being  so  closely  connected  with  a  bishop's  see,  was  under 
more  complete  episcopal  control  than  an  ordinary  monastery. 
But  in  truth  the  very  reverse  was  the  case ;  for  the  prior 
was  the  real  acting  head,  who  was  commonly  very  jealous  of 
the  bishop's  interference,  and  many  are  the  cases  in  monastic 
history  of  vehement  disputes  between  a  bishop  and  the  prior 
of  his  cathedral  convent.  Such  a  prior,  indeed,  required  to  be 
a  man  of  special  sagacity  and  moderation,  not  only  to  keep 
his  subordinates  in  order  but  to  maintain  his  own  firmly, 
and  at  the  same  time  respectfully,  against  his  diocesan  if 
necessary.  But  a  prior  would  sometimes  exalt  his  own 
authority  too  much,  without  improving  the  discipline.  The 
story  of  Norwich  priory  from  the  year  1492  is  certainly  not 
that  of  a  well-ordered  community.  In  Bishop  Goldwell's 
visitation  in  that  year  it  was  found,  among  other  things,  that 
women  spent  the  night  within  the  precincts  of  the  monastery; 
that  the  sub-sacrist  went  out  at  night  and  sat  too  long  with 


CH.  II      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES        103 

a  tailor  and  his  wife,  spending  money  profusely ;  that  the 
sacrist  sold  the  jewels  of  the  monastery ;  that  laymen  sat  at 
the  common  table  with  the  brethren,  and  that  the  monks 
walked  about  in  church  talking  with  women  of  bad  fame. 
The  bishop's  injunctions,  intended  to  meet  these  abuses, 
began  by  requiring  due  respect  for  his  own  authority,  annul- 
ling the  ordinances  of  a  previous  prior,  and  forbidding  such 
reverence  as  was  due  to  a  bishop  to  be  paid  to  a  prior  or 
any  other.  They  then  enjoined  the  masters  of  the  novices 
to  desist  from  some  new  style  of  teaching  that  they  had  in- 
troduced, and  return  to  the  old  accustomed  fashion.  The 
modern  statutes  were  to  be  erased  from  the  books,  and 
viands  good  and  sufficient  in  quantity  were  to  be  served  to 
the  canons.  For  the  worst  scandals,  touching  the  admis- 
sion of  women  within  the  monastery,  he  only  warned  the 
brethren  that  the  statutes  of  his  predecessor.  Bishop  Bate- 
man  (about  a  century  and  a  half  old),  were  still  binding  and 
must  be  observed. 

When  Bishop  Nix  visited  the  priory  in  1514  matters 
were  certainly  worse.  Among  the  comperta  it  is  stated 
that  the  brethren  are  not  studious  after  they  are  pro- 
moted to  the  priesthood;  that  their  friends  visit  them  in 
their  chambers  and  not  in  the  parlour;  that  suspected 
women  come  to  the  monastery ;  that  the  sub-prior  sets  a 
bad  example  as  regards  religion  and  chastity ;  that  a  cer- 
tain monk  had  got  an  unmarried  woman  with  child,  and 
that  the  priors  of  the  dependent  cells  were  in  many  ways 
remiss.  One  of  these  last  the  bishop  ordered  to  be  dis- 
missed, and  after  some  other  injunctions  he  "  continued  "  the 
visitation  until  the  following  Lent.  Six  years  later,  in  1520, 
there  seems  to  have  been  a  decided  improvement.  Prior 
Robert  Catton  showed  his  account,  which  proved  that  the 
monastery  was  out  of  debt ;  there  were  no  scandals,  and  the 
bishop's  injunctions  were  only  framed  to  correct  minor 
irregularities.  But  in  1526  things  had  got  worse  again ;  the 
sub-prior  was  too  easy  in  relaxing  penances,  the  precentor 
was  neglecting  his  duties.  One  monk  was  a  dandy,  and 
another  played  cards  and  dice  when  penance  was  enjoined  to 
him.  Dr.  Reppis  or  Repps  (who  was  soon  afterwards  made 
Abbot  of  St.  Benet's  Hulme,  and,  later.  Bishop  of  Norwich)  is 
accused  of  having  embraced  the  wardrober's  wife,  even  in  the 
presence  of  others.  There  is  a  great  tangle  of  complaints, 
but  we  do  not  know  what  they  all  came  to ;  for  the  bishop 
"  continued  "  his  visitation  from  June  to  August,  and  there 


I04  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

is  no  record  of   final   proceedings.      In    1532   we   hear   of 
various  irregularities  but  nothing  of  unchastity. 

After  these  varying  reports  that  of  the  Royal  Visitors  in 
1536  does  not  seem  so  incredible.  Only  one  monk  was 
found  to  have  had  intercourse  with  a  woman,  though  four 
others  were  found  to  be  impure. 

A  change  from  the  populous  city  of  Norwich  to  the  lonely 
St.  Benet's  swamps,  amid  which  then  rose  the  great  Abbey  of  St.  Benet's 
Hulme.  Hulme,  is  really  as  great  a  change  as  the  county  of  Norfolk 
could  show.  It  is  not  wonderful  that  in  such  a  country 
the  prior  in  1532  says  he  was  allowed  to  wear  shoes  and 
hose  (calcei  et  caligce)  instead  of  boots  {ocreoe)  by  the 
abbot's  leave,  on  account  of  an  ailment  in  his  legs.  The 
situation  was,  in  truth,  most  uninviting,  and  the  monks 
were  not  as  numerous  as  those  of  the  Cathedral ;  just 
twenty- four,  including  the  abbot  and  prior,  signed  the 
Supremacy  in  1534.  Yet  the  abbot  was  one  of  the  mitred 
abbots  who  sat  in  Parliament,  and  probably  the  very  fact 
that  he  was  often  called  away  from  the  monastery  had 
an  injurious  effect  upon  its  administration.  Scandals  and 
irregularities  certainly  appear  in  all  but  one  of  the  four 
episcopal  visitations.  But  in  1520,  under  the  effective  disci- 
pline of  Abbot  John  Salcot,  otherwise  named  Capon  (who 
unfortunately  earned  promotion  afterwards  to  two  successive 
bishoprics  by  doing  the  King's  dirty  work),  everything  was 
reported  well,  except  by  one  brother  who  made  a  slight  com- 
plaint against  the  prior.  Neither  is  there  anything  much 
amiss  in  1526,  except  that  one  brother  is  presented  for  lazi- 
ness in  lying  abed  and  evading  matins  on  pretence  of  illness. 
The  bishop  proposed  to  send  him  to  his  own  prison  at 
Norwich ;  but  Abbot  Salcot  intercedes  for  him  that  he  may 
have  another  trial.  At  the  last  episcopal  visitation,  in  1532, 
Salcot  having  been  promoted  to  the  Abbacy  of  Hyde  near 
Winchester,  Dr.  Eepps  was  abbot  in  his  place,  and  there  is 
certainly  an  appearance  of  order  having  been  let  down  some- 
what. Prior  Scottowe,  whose  tender  legs  required  indulgence, 
did  not  rise  to  matins.  His  negligence,  however,  is  com- 
plained of ;  for  owing  to  it  the  juniors  did  not  keep  silence 
or  observe  ceremonies,  but  strolled  outside  the  monastery. 
The  third  prior,  Thomas  Stonham,  hunted  in  the  morning 
after  matins,  going  out  at  three  or  four  o'clock ;  and  there 
were  far  too  many  dogs,  who  ate  up  what  should  have  been 
given  to  the  poor.  The  sacrist  was  accused  of  defaming  his 
brethren  at  meal  times.     These  are  the  principal  complaints. 


CH.  n      SUPPRESSION  OF  MONASTERIES        105 

But  we  hear  nothing  about  unchastity,  of  which  the  Eoyal 
Visitors  four  years  later  declared  four  of  the  monks  to  be 
guilty. 

The  two  worst  monasteries  in  the  diocese,  according  to 
the  report  of  the  Eoyal  Visitors,  must  have  been  the  priories 
of  Pentney  and  Westacre.  These  two  houses  were  about 
equal  in  size,  each  consisting  in  1534,  when  the  Supremacy 
was  signed,  of  a  prior  and  sixteen  canons.  Now,  in  all  the 
episcopal  visitations  Pentney  bears  an  absolutely  spotless  Pentney 
character.  Generally  the  canons  are  agreed  that  there  is 
nothing  whatever  to  report ;  but  complaints  crop  up  once  of 
the  want  of  a  schoolmaster,  and  another  time  of  an  inefficient 
tutor.  "  Of  Pentney,"  says  Dr.  Jessopp,  "  during  the  five 
centuries  that  it  lasted,  we  hear  nothing  but  good  reports, 
and  the  canons  of  that  house  kept  up  their  character  to  the 
end."  Yet  the  Royal  Visitors  did  not  scruple  to  report  that 
the  prior,  Robert  Codde,  and  five  of  the  canons  were  un- 
chaste ;  and  in  the  case  of  the  prior  they  said  they  knew, 
from  the  confession  of  the  Abbess  of  Martiam,  that  she  had 
a  child  by  him.  This  looks  bad ;  but  if  the  Abbess  of 
Marham  had  so  misconducted  herself,  it  may  well  be  that 
she  told  a  lie  in  accusing  the  Prior  of  Pentney  as  her 
seducer.  Marham  seems  to  have  had  a  bad  name.  Not 
only  are  the  Royal  Visitors  very  specific  about  the  failings 
of  these  nuns,  of  whom  four  besides  the  abbess,  by  their 
account,  had  borne  children,  but  even  the  Commissioners  of 
what  was  called  "  the  new  survey,"  who  report  so  much  more 
favourably  of  the  monasteries  generally,  describe  this  house 
as  "  of  slanderous  report."  ^  The  fact  was  probably  due  to 
its  being  exempt  from  episcopal  visitation  as  a  Cistercian 
nunnery.  As  regards  the  accused  Prior  of  Pentney,  how- 
ever, we  have  not  only  the  favourable  report  of  those  Com- 
missioners in  his  case,  but  a  special  intercession  that  was 
made  for  him  to  Cromwell:  "We  beseech  your  favour," 
wrote  Richard  Southwell  and  Robert  Hogen,  "  for  the  Prior 
of  Pentney,  assuring  you  that  he  relieves  those  quarters 
wondrously  where  he  dwells,  and  it  would  be  a  pity  not  to 
spare  a  house  that  feeds  so  many  indigent  poor,  which  is  in 
a  good  state,  maintains  good  service,  and  does  so  many 
charitable  deeds."  ^  The  house  itself  consisted  of  nine 
priests,  who  were,  by  the  report  of  the  Commissioners, 
"of  very  honest  fame  and  good  religious   persons  who    do 

^  See  Gasquet  in  the  Dublin  Review  for  April  1894. 
"^  L.  P.,  X.  563  :  also  xi.  518. 


io6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

desire  the  King's  licence  to  continue  and  remain  in 
religion."  ^ 
Westacre.  At  Westacre  there  were  certainly  complaints  of  various 
kinds,  but  the  only  charges  of  impurity  are  in  the  visitation  of 
1514  (when  improper  intercourse  is  hinted  at,  whether  truly 
or  not,  between  the  prior  and  the  wife  of  John  Smyth),  and 
in  that  of  1532,  when  the  butler  is  reported  as  having  an 
illegitimate  child  supported  by  the  priory.  But  in  1536  the 
Eoyal  Visitors  made  a  double  report  about  Westacre,  the  first 
statement  aspersing  nine  canons  with  impurity,  one  of  them 
with  various  women ;  the  second  statement  accusing  Prior 
Wingfield  and  another  canon  of  what  could  only  have  been 
learned,  if  true,  from  their  own  confessions,  and  imputing 
to  another  canon  adultery  with  a  married  woman,  and  to 
another  connection  with  two  women  and  unnatural  crime 
besides. 

There  are  a  few  other  monasteries  besides  in  the 
diocese  of  Norwich,  in  which  the  results  of  episcopal  and 
royal  visitations  may  be  compared.  But  perhaps  the  above 
examples  may  suffice.  Whoever  would  pursue  the  subject 
further  will  find  the  episcopal  visitations  printed  by  Dr. 
Jessopp  in  one  of  the  Camden  Society's  publications.^  From 
the  reports  as  a  whole  we  can  certainly  see  that  monasteries 
differed  greatly  in  character,  and  we  can  understand  what 
the  inmates  themselves  regarded  in  each  case  as  the  things 
most  requiring  amendment.  It  is  impossible  to  rise  from 
the  perusal  without  a  feeling  that  vice  did  make  its  way  at 
times  into  these  retreats  for  piety ;  but  that  many  of  them 
were  deeply  tainted,  or  were  allowed  long  to  continue  so, 
does  not  seem  to  me  a  justifiable  inference  from  these  very 
frank  revelations. 

^  Gasquet,  u.  s. 

2   Visitations  of  the  Diocese  of  Norwich,  A.D.   1492-1533.     Edited  by  the 
Rev.  A.  Jessopp,  D.D.,  1888. 


CHAPTER   III 

FURTHER    PROCEEDINGS    AGAINST    MONASTERIES AND 

AGAINST    SUPERSTITIONS 

Without  entering  into  many  details  of  the  suppression 
of  the  larger  monasteries,  which,  as  already  mentioned, 
was  mainly  efifected  by  individual  surrenders,  a  few 
examples  of  what  was  going  on,  and  of  the  methods 
practised,  may  be  desirable.  But  in  the  first  instance 
it  is  as  well  to  take  note  of  the  chronology  of  the  Chronology 
other  important  events  that  were  taking  place.  °^®^^'^*'- 
Katharine  of  Aragon  had  died  on  the  7th  January 
1536,  to  the  great  satisfaction  of  her  inhuman  husband, 
who  was  relieved  of  any  fear  that  the  Emperor  would 
make  war  on  England  to  secure  justice  to  his  aunt. 
Her  rival,  Anne  Boleyn,  was  beheaded  on  the  19th 
May  following,  and  the  King  married  his  third  wife, 
Jane  Seymour,  on  the  30th  of  the  same  month.  In 
the  summer  the  work  of  suppressing  the  smaller 
monasteries  began ;  and  in  October  broke  out  the 
Lincolnshire  insurrection,  succeeded  by  one  in  York- 
shire, which  was  quieted  by  false  assurances.  These 
very  serious  outbreaks  were  largely  due  to  the  measures 
taken  against  the  monasteries,  and  they  might  have 
had  a  very  different  result  if  Reginald  Pole,  now  at 
Rome,  whom  the  Pope  had  created  a  cardinal,  and 
designed  to  send  as  legate  into  England,  or  as  near  it 
as  possible,  had  been  able  to  start  sooner  on  his 
mission.  Rebellion  in  the  North,  however,  had  already 
been  subdued  or  disarmed  before  he  left  Rome,  and 

107 


io8  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

when  he  afterwards  passed  through  France,  and  then 
through  Flanders,  where  he  was  obliged  to  turn  to 
Liege  for  an  asylum,  neither  Francis  I.  nor  Mary  of 
Hungary  dared  to  receive  him  as  legate,  for  fear  of 
incurring  the  enmity  of  Henry,  who  denounced  him  as 
a  traitor  to  himself,  and  even  demanded  his  extradition. 
Thus  in  1537  England  was  still  cut  off  from 
Eome,  and  the  hope  which  had  begun  to  be  enter- 
tained at  Anne  Boleyn's  fall  of  bringing  Henry 
and  his  kingdom  back  to  the  unity  of  Christendom 
was  altogether  frustrated.  The  bishops  and  leading 
divines  of  England  held  a  Council,  in  which  they 
drew  up  a  manual  of  religious  teaching  called  Tlie 
Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,  published  with  the 
King's  sanction,  though  not  by  his  express  authority 
as  Head  of  the  Church,  for  he  professed  that  he  had 
found  no  time  to  examine  it  carefully.  It  was  clearly 
a  tentative  effort  towards  a  system  of  religious  instruc- 
tion which  ignored  the  Pope's  authority,  but  neverthe- 
less could  not  be  impugned  as  heretical.  In  October 
of  the  same  year  Queen  Jane  Seymour  gave  birth  to  a 
son,  the  future  Edward  VL,  and  died  a  few  days  after. 
As  yet,  since  the  suppression  of  the  smaller  monas- 
teries, none  of  the  greater  had  surrendered  except 
Chertsey,  which  consented  to  be  extinguished  with  a 
view  to  a  larger  monastic  foundation.  But  just  at 
this  time  it  would  appear  that  Cromwell  and  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk  had  arranged  together  to  obtain 
Dissolution  from  tlic  King  a  grant  of  the  possessions  of  the  Priory 
Prior^^^  of  Lewes,  which  they  found  means  to  get  the  prior  to 
give  up  into  the  King's  hands.  How  the  prior  was 
reconciled  to  this  is  not  difficult  to  conjecture.  In 
his  visitation  in  1535  Layton  professed  to  have  found 
great  immorality  at  Farleigh  in  Wiltshire,  a  cell  of 
Lewes,  and  to  have  gathered  matter  sufficient  to 
bring  the  Prior  of  Lewes  into  great  danger  if  the 
testimony  against  him  was  true.^     Later  on  he  visited 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  42. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    109 

Lewes  itself,  where  lie  made  the  sub -prior  confess 
treason  in  his  preaching,  and  then  denounced  the  prior 
as  a  perjured  traitor ;  the  prior  all  the  while  kneeling 
and  imploring  him  not  to  report  his  conduct  to  Crom- 
well. Layton,  nevertheless,  summoned  him  to  appear 
before  Cromwell  on  All  Hallows  Day,  wherever  he  and 
the  King  might  happen  to  be  at  that  date,  bringing 
the  sub -prior  along  with  him/  The  only  result, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  that  the  prior  was 
very  sufiSciently  tamed.  He  remained  in  possession 
of  his  house  for  two  years  longer,  receiving  letters 
from  Cromwell  from  time  to  time  to  give  up  this  or 
that  farm  belonging  to  the  priory  to  some  nominee 
of  the  King  or  his  Vicegerent."  Occasionally,  indeed, 
the  orders  were  contradictory  in  favour  of  dififerent 
applicants,  owing  to  the  multitude  of  suitors  and  the 
confusion  of  public  business ;  but  the  poor  prior  did 
his  best  to  give  satisfaction,  till  now  it  was  proposed 
to  make  him  give  up  the  priory  and  all  its  possessions 
to  the  King. 

The  first  steps  taken  towards  the  extinction  of  this 
monastery  will  be  seen  by  the  following  letter,  which, 
has  an  interest  of  its  own  besides  : — 


The  Duke  of  Noefolk  to  Ckomwell 

My  very  good  Lord,  with  most  hearty  thanks  for  your 
venison.  These  shall  be  to  advertise  you  that  where  I 
perceive  by  your  letter  ye  would  know  how  I  sped  with  the 
King's  Highness  yesterday ; — first,  at  my  coming  to  his 
Majesty  I  used  myself,  though,  peradventure,  not  wisely,  yet 
after  mine  accustomed  manner,  plainly,  exhorting  his  Highness 
to  take  in  good  part  the  pleasure  of  Almighty  God  in  taking 
out  of  this  transitory  life  the  Queen  our  late  mistress,  and  to 
recomfort  himself  with  the  high  treasure  sent  to  him  and  his 
realm,  that  is  to  say,  the  Prince,  with  many  other  persuasions 
to  advise  him  to  tract  no  longer  time  than  force  should  drive 
him  unto  to  provide  for  a  new  wife,  by  whom,  of  likelihood,, 

1  L.  P.,  IX.  632.  "^  L.P.,  xr.  214,  373,  448,  583. 


1 10  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

more  children  might  be  brought  forth  to  our  most  rejoice  and 
consolation.  After  that  I  most  humbly  thanked  his  Majesty 
for  that  I  perceived  by  your  good  Lordship  he  was  content  to 
give  unto  us  Lewes  if  we  might  bring  the  bargain  to  pass, 
saying  and  rehearsing  further,  concerning  your  service  done 
to  him,  no  less  than  I  said  to  you  in  your  garden.  And 
further,  that  I  should  be  fully  contented  with  that  ye  should 
have  two  parts  and  I  the  third ;  whereunto  his  answer  was, 
as  ye  showed  unto  me  he  said  to  you,  that  he  thought  the 
same  well  bestowed  upon  us.  Surely  I  found  his  Highness 
not  only  better  Lord  to  us  both  than  for  my  part  I  have  or 
can  deserve,  but  also  desirous,  as  I  might  by  his  words  and 
gesture  perceive,  that  we  might  compass  this  matter  to  our 
contentations.  Many  other  communications  was  between  us, 
too  long  to  molest  you  withal ;  and  therefore  [I]  shall  forbear 
writing  thereof  unto  our  next  meeting.  And  as  concerning 
order  to  be  taken  for  our  business  here,  Mr.  Comptroller^ 
can  declare  the  same  unto  you,  being  present  at  that  matter 
only.  And  as  for  the  third  part,  I  will  remain  in  the  deter- 
mination I  told  you  of.  And  thus  most  heartily  fare  you 
well.  From  Hampton  Court,  the  4th  of  ISTovember. — Yours 
assuredly,  T.  Norfolk. 

Addressed :  To  my  very  good  Lord,  my  Lord  Privy  Seal.^ 

The  matter  having  been  thus  arranged,  the  Prior 
of  Lewes  came  up  to  London,  and  on  the  12th 
November  at  the  Eolls  "  acknowledged  a  fine  "  (that 
is  to  say,  made  a  conveyance)  both  of  Lewes  priory 
and  of  its  cell,  Castleacre,  "  though  it  is  thought," 
writes  Cromwell's  servant  Polsted,  "  that  the  latter 
does  not  pass  by  the  fine."  There  were  legal  scruples 
in  the  matter,  it  seems,  whether  there  were  moral 
ones  or  not.  "It  is  now  fully  resolved,"  Polsted 
adds,  "  that  there  shall  be  no  such  preamble  to  the 
deed."  We  shall  see  what  this  means  by  and  by. 
The  prior,  it  is  further  stated,  affirmed  that  the  Duke 
of  Norfolk  had  promised  him  all  the  goods  and  one- 
half  the  debts  due  to  the  monastery.^  A  formal  sur- 
render was  required  besides  the  fine,  and  it  was  duly 

1  Sir  William  Paulet,  Controller  of  the  Household. 
2  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  1030.  '  L.  P.,  xii.  ii.  1062. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   iii 

executed  by  the  prior  and  convent  on  the  16th,  and 
acknowledged  the  same  day  before  one  of  the 
clerks  of  Chancery.  The  like  surrender  was  made 
and  acknowledged  by  the  prior  and  convent  of 
Castleacre  on  the  22nd,  and  both  convents  executed 
further  deeds  of  conveyance  to  the  Crown,  each  on 
the  day  of  surrender.  Then,  the  whole  property  being 
thus  in  the  King's  hands,  a  grant  was  made  to  the 
Duke  on  the  22nd  December  of  Castleacre  and  its 
possessions  in  fee  simple.  The  parent  house  of  Lewes 
with  its  possessions  was  granted  to  Cromwell  in  like 
manner  on  the  16th  February  following.^ 

Thus  fell  the  most  ancient  monastery  of  the  Cluniac 
Order  in  England,  a  house  founded  by  William,  Earl 
Warrenne,  within  twelve  years  of  the  Norman  Con- 
quest, and  possessing  a  clear  yearly  revenue,  as 
certified  at  the  great  valuation  three  years  before  the 
suppression,  of  over  £920.-  Cromwell  had  the  larger 
share  of  the  plunder,  and  knew  well  what  he  meant  to 
do  with  it.  Early  in  March,  Lord  Lisle's  correspondent 
Husee  writes  to  inform  his  master  that  Mr.  Polsted 
was  going  into  Sussex  to  "  dissolve  "  my  lord's  house 
of  Lewes,  and  was  expected  to  be  away  for  a  fort- 
night.^ Polsted  probably  took  with  him  an  Italian 
engineer  named  Giovanni  Portinari,  with  seventeen 
workmen,  who  had  instructions  to  pull  down  the  priory 
church — this  was  the  way  it  was  to  be  "dissolved." 
On  his  arrival,  the  Italian  found  the  church  larger 
than  he  had  been  given  to  expect.  It  was  420  feet  Descrip- 
in  length,  69|-  feet  in  breadth  from  the  entrance  to  the  {j°iyj^*^^ 
middle,  and  150  feet  in  the  middle  portion  ;  the  height 
was  63  feet.  The  circumference  within  was  given  as 
1558^^  feet ;  outside,  1512  feet.*  The  wall  in  front  was 
10  feet  thick,  and  at  the  sides  5  feet.     The  wall  of  the 

1  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  1101,  1311  (30)  ;  xiii.  i.  384  (74). 

2  See  Dugdale's  Monasticon,  v.  1. 

3  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  421. 

*  Strange  that  the  inside  circumference  should  have  measured  more  than 
the  outside  !     But  such  was  Portinari's  report. 


112  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

steeple,  which  was  on  one  side  of  the  front,  was  10  feet 
thick.  There  were  thirty- two  pillars,  eight  of  them 
very  large,  of  which  four  supported  a  lofty  roof  after 
the  fashion  of  a  belfry,  the  other  four  a  still  higher 
one,  where  five  bells  were  hung.  Each  of  these  eight 
pillars  was  14  feet  thick,  45  in  circumference;  the 
other  twenty-four  were  10  feet  thick,  25^  in  circum- 
ference. The  height  of  the  roof  in  front  of  the  great 
altar  was  93  feet,  and  of  that  in  the  middle  of  the 
church  where  the  five  bells  were  hung  105  feet.'^ 

Such  a  fine  massive  building  surely  deserved  to  be 
spared ;  but  the  Italian,  when  he  had  taken  the 
measure  of  the  work,  assured  his  employer  that  all 
should  be  pulled  down.  They  began  on  Friday  the 
15th,  cutting  the  wall  behind  the  high  altar,  where 
there  were  five  chapels  and  four  pillars  supporting  a 
vault  over  the  altar.  Their  plan  was  to  cut  down 
under  the  foundations  and  put  in  props,  which  after- 
wards it  was  proposed  to  burn  or  to  blast  with  powder 
as  might  seem  most  advisable.  The  business  might 
take  eight  or  ten  days  at  the  longest,  but  the  whole 
fabric  would  by  that  time  be  demolished.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  it  took  them  just  a  week  before  they 
pulled  down  the  four  pillars  and  the  five  chapels 
behind  the  altar,  and  on  the  24th  there  was  still  a 
very  high  vault  with  four  great  pillars  to  throw  down. 
But  no  doubt  it  would  soon  be  done,  and  on  Tuesday 
(the  26th)  they  would  begin  melting  the  lead.^ 

All  was  to  be  demolished ;  but  there  must  have 

^  So  in  Portinari's  letter  ;  but  perhaps  35  was  meant,  as  pillars  10  feet 
thick  must  have  been  ovei-  30  feet  in  circumference. 

^  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  554,  590.  Morison's  translation  of  this  letter  is  careless. 
The  passage,  "  I  told  your  Lordship  of  a  vaute  on  the  ryghte  syde  of  the  hygh 
altare,"  should  be  ^^  behind  the  high  altar";  drieto  is  the  Avord.  But  the 
worst  inaccuracies  are  in  the  measurements  given  at  the  end,  some  of  which 
are  omitted  altogether,  while  the  length  of  the  church  is  made  only  150  feet 
("el.  fote"),  when  it  is  expressly  given  in  the  original  as  140  yards,  or  420 
feet.  Wright's  editing  also  is  inaccurate  here  and  there,  and  in  one  passage 
where  the  paper  is  decayed  he  has  completed  a  word  erroneously.  The  read- 
ing must  have  been,  to  correspond  with  the  original,  "A  Tuesday  they  begin 
(not  began)  to  cast  the  ledde." 

3  i.  P.,  XIII.  i.  554,  590. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS  113 

been  on  the  property  some  pleasant  residence,  which 
Cromwell  desired  for  his  son  Gregory ;  who,  in  point 
of  fact,  writes  to  him  from  Lewes  on  the  11th  of 
next  month  to  tell  him  how  he  and  his  wife  are 
pleased  alike  with  the  house  and  the  situation.  A 
little  later  they  had  to  remove  for  a  time  in  con- 
sequence of  an  epidemic  of  plague,  but  they  soon 
returned.^ 

Thus  was  one  great  monastery  absorbed  by  private 
greed.  Somewhat  different  was  the  case  of  Bisham  change 
or  Bustlesham,  of  which  the  King  had  got  William  ^Jj^^^J* 
Barlow  made  prior  in  the  spring  of  1535.^  In  January 
1536  Barlow,  retaining  this  priory,  was  made  Bishop  of 
St.  Asaph's,  and  translated  to  St.  David's  in  April 
following.  In  July  of  the  same  year  he  granted  his 
monastery  of  Bisham  to  the  King  by  charter  under 
the  convent  seal.  But  a  year  later,  in  July  1537,  the 
abbot  and  convent  of  Chertsey  were  induced  to 
surrender  their  monastery  to  the  King  with  a  view  to 
the  re-erection  of  Bisham  and  its  more  munificent 
re-endowment  as  a  mitred  abbey. ^  Chertsey  had  been 
visited  in  September  1535  by  Dr.  Legh,  who  trans- 
mitted to  Cromwell  a  special  compendium  comper- 
torum  for  that  particular  monastery  much  of  the 
same  character  as  the  reports  on  other  places,  though 
Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  in  whose  diocese  it 
lay,  along  with  Mr.  Treasurer  Fitzwilliam,  had  made 
a  special  visit  to  it  not  long  before  by  the  King's 
command,  and  had  reported  that  all  was  well  there.'' 
The  Visitors,  however,  found  no  other  fault  with  the 
abbot  himself,  John  Cordrey,  except  that  he  had 
alienated  some  of  the  property ;  and  as  to  the  foul 
charges  which  they  made  against  thirteen  of  the 
monks  (nearly  the  whole  convent),  nobody  seems  to 
have  believed  them.  At  all  events,  the  surrender 
was  signed  by  the  abbot  and  fifteen  monks  on  the 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  734,  1059,  1281.  *  L.  P.,  viii.  553,  596. 

»  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  220,  1311  (22).  •*  L.  P.,  IX.  472. 

VOL.   II  I 


1 14  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

6tli  July  1537,  with  a  view,  as  above  shown,  to  the 
re-endowment  of  Bisham. 

The  new  foundation,  as  set  forth  in  the  charter 
which  was  granted  on  the  18th  December  following, 
was  to  be  called  "  King  Henry  the  Eighth's  new 
monastery  of  Holy  Trinity  of  Bustelesham."  But 
its  career  was  a  very  short  one ;  for  on  the  1 9th  June 
1538  Abbot  Cordrey  surrendered  it  to  the  Crown, 
just  as  he  had  surrendered  Chertsey.  So  that  it 
existed  exactly  six  months,  and  then  was  extinguished 
for  ever. 

It  may  have  been  one  object  with  the  King  in  a 
design  so  soon  laid  aside  to  show  more  fully  his 
competence  to  exercise  papal  functions  in  England 
l)y  giving  the  new  abbot  the  right  to  wear  a  mitre. 
But  in  1538  he  was  beginning  to  force  monasteries 
in  general  to  surrender.  At  first,  indeed,  he  would 
fain  have  prevented  the  least  suspicion  being  en- 
tertained that  any  such  general  dissolution  was 
intended.  The  monastic  Visitors  might  again  be 
stirring ;  but  their  movements  need  not  be  so  inter- 
preted. Valuable  results  might  still  be  obtained 
from  a  line  of  action  that  they  had  already  begun. 
For  Legh  and  Lay  ton  in  their  late  visitation  had 
reported  not  only  on  the  vices  which  they  alleged 
were  practised  in  the  monasteries,  but  also  on  their 
superstitions.  What  discoveries,  in  this  matter,  had 
they  not  made — discoveries,  it  is  true,  of  things  very 
well  known  and  laughed  at  by  superior  intelligence. 
How  many  fragments  of  the  Holy  Cross,  how  many 
phials  of  the  Blessed  Virgin's  milk !  How  many 
places  were  noted  for  pilgrimages :  the  shrine  of  St. 
Chad  at  Lichfield,  that  of  St.  Ethelburg  at  Thurgarton, 
that  of  St.  William  at  York,  not  to  speak  of  others. 
And  with  or  apart  from  pilgrimages,  how  much 
quackery!  Men  went  to  Repton  in  Derbyshire  to 
visit  St.  Guthlac  and  his  bell,  which  they  put  on 
people's  heads  to  alleviate  headache.    Very  likely,  the 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   115 

journey  thitlier  had  that  effect  and  the  bell  did  no 
particular  harm.  The  nuns  of  Gracedieu  had  the 
girdle  and  part  of  the  tunic  of  St.  Francis,  which 
were  supposed  to  help  lying  -  in  women.  Other 
localities,  too,  possessed  relics  with  the  like  property, 
as  Meaux  in  Yorkshire,  which  had  the  girdle  of 
St.  Bernard,  and  Newburgh,  which  had  the  girdle  of 
St.  Saviour ;  while  Holm  Cultram  in  Cumberland 
had  at  least  a  necklace  called  an  Agnus  Dei  with 
the  like  beneficial  virtue.^  Surely  it  was  important 
to  purify  religion  from  superstition,  especially  when 
the  King's  revenues  might  be  augmented  by  so  doing  ! 

In  1538  both  Legh  and  Lay  ton  were  started  on  TheVisi- 
their  old  work  again,  visiting  monasteries,  but  o'lTcircui?- 
privately  charged  to  take  surrenders  of  them  also, 
when  convenient.  In  the  very  beginning  of  January, 
Dr.  Legh  took  the  surrender  of  Muchelney  Abbey 
in  Somerset.  A  month  later  he  was  at  Chester, 
where  he  o-ot  the  old  and  infirm  Abbot  of  St.  Wer- 

o 

burgh's  to  resign  on  his  coming.  In  another  month, 
after  visiting  some  houses  in  Yorkshire,  he  had  reached 
the  borders  of  Scotland  and  taken  the  surrender  of 
Holm  Cultram ;  from  which  he  proceeded  afterwards 
through  the  Midlands.  We  need  not  follow  his 
whole  progress  in  detail.-  Meanwhile  his  fellow, 
Layton,  had  likewise  resumed  his  functions,  accom- 
panied this  time  by  Robert  Southwell,  Attorney  of 
the  Court  of  Augmentations.  To  proceed  on  a  circuit 
with  such  a  colleague  was  rather  calculated  to  raise 
disquieting  suspicions  ;  and  when  they  reached  Barn- 
well Priory  in  Cambridgeshire,  it  was  hinted  that 
they  were  going  to  suppress  that  priory  on  their  way  ,ieny  that 
into  Norfolk,  and  all  other  monasteries  wherever  they  ^^^^^  'Y*^ 
came.  It  was  01  great  importance  to  stop  such  suppress 
rumours  as  this,  or  the  monks  would   find  various  ^''^™*^i^' 

'  .  .  or  nioncos- 

devices   to   prevent   the   property  getting   into    the  teries 
King's  clutches.      So  Layton  boldly  denounced  the  generally. 

'  L.  P.,  X.  364.  '^  See  L.  P.,  xiii.,  references  in  index. 


ii6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

report  as  a  slander  against  the  King,  and  charged 
the  abbots  that  they  should  not,  for  any  such  vain 
babbling,  sell,  waste,  or  alienate  any  of  their  property.^ 
In  point  of  fact,  the  Priory  of  Barnwell  was  spared 
for  ten  months  longer,  and  Layton  and  Southwell 
seem  to  have  taken  no  surrenders  till  they  came  to 
Westacre  in  Norfolk,  which  they  two  and  Sir  Thomas 
L'Estrange  had  a  special  commission  to  take  into 
the  King's  hand.  For  this,  it  would  seem,  there 
They  take  were  plausible  pretexts.  Westacre  was  rather  a  small 
iendeTof  liouse,  having  only  eight  canons  besides  the  prior, 
Westacre,  and  the  property  was  much  encumbered.  The  prior 
and  canons,  indeed,  were  somehow  got  to  confess  in 
a  formal  document  signed  by  them,  and  with  the 
convent  seal  attached,  that  they  had  forfeited  all 
right  to  the  monastery  and  its  possessions  by  the 
way  they  had  administered  their  property.  "  Stirred 
by  grief  of  conscience  to  great  contrition  for  their 
manifold  negligences,  enormities,  and  abuses  of  long 
time  practised  by  them  and  their  predecessors  under 
the  pretence  and  shadow  of  perfect  religion  " — such 
are  the  words,  briefly  condensed,  of  the  exordium — 
they  admit  that  their  course  of  life  has  been  "  to  the 
grievous  displeasure  of  Almighty  God  and  the  crafty 
deception  and  subtle  seduction  of  good  Christian 
people,  not  only  in  omitting  the  execution  of  observ- 
ances that  they  were  bound  by  their  vows  to  their 
founders,  the  King's  progenitors,  to  maintain,  but 
also  in  letting  their  property  be  dilapidated.  Prostrate 
at  the  King's  feet,  to  prevent  his  Highness  being  any 
more  abused  with  such  feigned  devotion,  and  con- 
sidering their  imminent  peril  of  damnation  if  they 
persist,  they  beg  him  to  accept,  of  their  free  gift 
unprompted,  all  the  possessions  and  rights  they  have 
in  their  monastery  as  rightfully  belonging  to  himself 
by  reason  of  their  offences  and  his  Grace's  laws  ;  and, 
without  other  compulsion    than   that   of  their  own 

1  L.  p.,  xiii.  i.  102. 


CH.  in  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   117 

consciences,  they  have  declared  this  before  Richard 
Layton,  LL.D.,  Archdeacon  of  Buckingham,  Robert 
Southwell,  Attorney  of  the  Augmentations,  and  Sir 
Thomas  Le  Straunge,  the  Commissioners,"  ^ 

The  above  is  the  very  language  of  the  original 
document  slightly  abridged ;  and  it  seems  extra- 
ordinary that — though  this  monastery,  very  likely, 
was  not  untainted  in  morals " — a  prior  and  eight  canons 
could  have  been  induced  to  sign  a  confession  so  humili- 
ating, and,  we  may  add,  so  untrue.  For,  of  course,  no 
one  will  readily  believe  that  the  document  was,  as  it 
professes  to  be,  unprompted  ;  and  if  a  doubt  could  exist 
about  the  matter,  we  shall  see  presently  very  distinct 
evidence  that  the  abject  submission  was  drawn  up  by 
the  Royal  Commissioners,  and  that  the  canons  were 
only  required  to  put  their  signatures  to  it.  The  date 
was  the  14th  January  in  the  twenty -ninth  year  of 
Henry  VIII.  (1538).  A  surrender  was  taken  on  the 
following  day  of  all  the  possessions  of  the  house, 
specifying  the  names  of  the  several  manors  ;  and 
the  Commissioners  reported  to  Cromwell  what  they 
had  done.  The  monastery,  unfortunately,  was  so 
encumbered  that  they  found,  with  all  their  legal 
astuteness,  that  it  would  require  some  leisure  to 
"  revoke  or  reduce,"  for  the  Kino-'s  benefit,  the  "  blind 
bargains"  made,  as  they  said,  by  the  folly  of  the 
governors.  It  is  clear,  however,  that  even  property 
so  encumbered  as  that  of  many  of  the  monasteries 
was  could  be  relieved  of  many  burdens  by  the  dex- 
terity of  the  Crown  lawyers,  while  of  course  it  was 
freed  from  all  the  old  charges  of  keeping  up  hospitality 
for  wayfarers.^ 

The  policy   of  denying   rumours   that   a    general 

^  Tins  document,  which  is  dated  14th  Jan.  29  Hen.  VIII.,  has,  nn- 
fortunately,  not  been  noticed  in  L.  P.,  though  a  notice  of  it  will  be  found 
in  the  list  of  Acknowledgments  of  Royal  Supremacy  in  the  Record  Office 
(with  which  it  had  been  improperly  placed)  in  the  Seventh  Report  of  the 
Dep.  Keeper  of  the  Public  Records,  App.  ii.  p.  304.     It  is  numbered  117t. 

-  See  p.  106.  ^  L.  P.,  xiii.  i.  85,  86,  101 


1 18  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

suppression  was  intended  had  been  impressed  upon 
Lay  ton  before  he  set  out  on  his  journey  by  the  wary 
and  unscrupulous  Cromwell ;  but  it  was  only  in  pass- 
ing through  Cambridgeshire  that  he  was  made  to 
feel  its  vital  importance.  He  not  only  charged  the 
abbots  and  priors  of  the  district  not  to  alienate  their 
property  from  any  such  idle  apprehensions,  but 
commanded  them,  if  knaves  would  so  report,  to  put 
them  in  the  stocks ;  if  gentlemen  did  so,  to  certify 
Cromwell  and  the  Council  about  it.  Thus  it  was  made 
dangerous  to  suggest  what  nevertheless  was  virtually 
true.  "  This  digression,"  he  wrote  to  Cromwell, 
"  has  hindered  us  from  Westacre ;  but,  if  I  had  not 
sped  it  before  the  dissolution  of  the  same,  the  abbots 
and  priors  would  have  made  foul  shifts  before  we 
could  have  finished  at  Westacre.  Your  command  to 
me  in  your  gallery  in  that  behalf  was  more  weighty 
than  I  then  judged.  As  for  Westacre,  what  falsehood 
in  the  prior  and  convent,  what  bribery,  spoil  and 
ruin  contrived  by  the  inhabitants,  it  were  long  to 
write ;  but  their  wrenches,  wiles  and  guiles,  shall 
nothing  them  prevail."  It  would  seem  that  it  was 
only  the  terror  of  what  might  be  in  store  for  them 
under  the  unknown  complexities  of  a  system  of  law 
which  was  sure  to  be  strained  in  its  interpretation, 
that  induced  the  prior  and  convent  to  put  their 
hands  to  the  humiliating  submission. 

After  the  surrender  of  Westacre,  it  was  a  month 
and  a  half  before  Layton  and  his  colleague  took  any 
similar  step.     People,  of  course,  might  have  formed 
their  own  opinions,  and  rumours  might  have  grown 
in  spite  of  official  denials  and  threats.     Perhaps  they 
were  maturing  a  new  policy,  or  taking  counsel  how 
to  make  their  position  stronger  in  their  further  pro- 
ami,  some    ceedings.     Again  they  obtained  a  special  commission 
jH^e^  a  er,  ^^^  themsclves  and  a  local  gentleman,  and  on  the 
Andrew's,    jg^  March  they  were  at  Northampton,  along  with 
ton.   *"*^   Sir  William  Parr,  uncle  of  the  lady  who  afterwards 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   119 

became  Henry  VIII.'s  last  queen.  Tlie  monastery  of 
St.  Andrew's,  Northampton,  was  one  of  those  that 
Layton  had  already  visited  little  more  than  two  years 
before,  when  he  reported  that  though  its  revenue  was 
£400  a  year  it  was  very  much  in  debt,  that  the  lands 
were  sold  or  mortgaged,  and  that  the  rents  of  the 
farms  were  received  beforehand  under  bonds  for  the 
payment  of  various  chantries.  But  the  prior,  he 
said,  w^as  a  Bachelor  of  Divinity,  "  a  great  husband," 
and  a  good  clerk,  and  if  he  were  promoted  "to  a 
better  thing  "  the  King  might  take  the  monastery  into 
his  hands  and  recover  all  the  lands  again.  He  added 
that  if  the  King  agreed,  he  would  suggest  the  matter 
to  the  prior  on  his  own  return  from  the  North. ^  This 
was  in  December  1535.  Now  on  the  2nd  March 
1538  the  surrender  was  actually  made  by  the  prior 
and  canons ;  and  the  manner  in  which  it  was  taken 
was  precisely  the  same  as  in  the  case  of  Westacre. 
That  is  to  say,  it  was  preceded  by  a  similar  humiliat- 
ing avowal  of  infidelity  to  their  trust,  dereliction  of 
duty,  and  fear  of  damnation  by  professedly  conscience- 
stricken  canons.  Only,  in  this  case  the  confession 
was  far  more  lengthy  and  more  abject.  Like  their 
brother  canons  of  Westacre — for  they  belonged  to  the 
same  Order  (the  Augustinian) — they  professed  to  be 
moved  with  great  contrition  for  the  enormities  and 
abuses  of  which  they  and  their  predecessors  had 
been  guilty  "  under  the  pretence  and  shadow 
of  perfect  religion."  The  exordium,  in  fact,  was 
the  same,  word  for  word,  showing  clearly  that 
it  was  not  drawn  up  in  the  cloister  either  of 
Westacre  or  of  Northampton.  But  the  depth  of 
abasement,  long  drawn  out,  which  was  put  into 
the  mouths  of  the  Northampton  canons  can  only 
be  gauged  by  a  comparatively  minute  extract 
or  two.  Here  are  the  exact  words  in  one 
passage  : — 

1  Wright's  Suppression,  92,  93. 


120  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

But  as  well  we  as  others  our  predecessors  called  religious 
persons  within  your  said  monastery,  taking  on  us  the  habit 
or  outward  vesture  of  the  said  rule,  only  to  the  intent  to 
lead  our  lives  in  an  idle  quietness  and  not  in  virtuous 
exercise,  in  a  stately  estimation,  and  not  in  obedient  humility, 
have,  under  the  shadow  or  colour  of  the  said  rule  and  habit, 
vainly,  detestably,  and  also  ungodly,  employed,  yea  rather 
devoured,  the  yearly  revenues  issuing  and  coming  of  the 
said  possessions,  in  continual  ingurgitations  and  farcings  of 
our  carayne  [sic]  bodies,  and  of  others,  the  supporters  of  our 
voluptuous  and  carnal  appetite,  with  other  vain  and  ungodly 
expenses,  to  the  manifest  subversion  of  devotion  and  clean- 
ness of  living.  .  .  .  Which  our  most  horrible  abominations 
and  execrable  persuasions  of  your  Grace's  people  to  detestable 
errors,  and  our  long  covered  hypocrisy  cloaked  with  feigned 
sanctity,  we  revolving  daily  and  continually  pondering  in 
our  sorrowful  hearts,  and  thereby  perceiving  the  bottomless 
gulf  of  everlasting  fire  ready  to  devour  us  if,  persisting  in 
this  state  of  living,  we  should  depart  from  this  uncertain  and 
transitory  life ;  constrained  by  the  intolerable  anguish  of  our 
conscience,-^  etc. 

What  are  we  to  think  of  so  much  abasement  and 
so  much  confession  of  hypocrisy  and  sin  where 
Layton  himself  had  found  no  great  enormities  two 
years  before,  although  he  was  then  on  the  lookout 
for  them  wherever  he  went  ?  We  might  readily 
suspect  the  genuineness  of  the  document,  as  the 
original  is  not  known  now  to  exist,  and  we  have 
only  two  manuscript  copies  of  a  later  age,  besides 
the  text  printed  early  in  the  seventeenth  century. 
But  the  fact  that  some  such  document  was  obtained 
from  the  convent  is  clear  from  the  words  of  the 
Royal  Commissioners  themselves,  who  also  show  dis- 
tinctly how  falsely  it  pretends  to  be  the  spontaneous 
act  of  the  prior  and  canons,  when  they  write  to 
Cromwell :  "  We  have  taken  a  release  and  a  deed 
of  feoffment  of  the  monastery  of  St.  Andrew's  in 
Northampton  to  the  King's  use,  and  an  humble 
submission     of     the     prior     and    convent,     as    we 

1  See  the  full  text  in  Weaver's  Funeral  Monuments,  pp.  106-110. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS  121 

suppose,  to  the  King's  honor  and  contentation, 
r^erring  our  diligence  and  doings  therein  to  your 
judgment^  ^ 

A  letter  written  the  same  day  by  Southwell, 
apart  from  his  fellow-commissioners,  to  Cromwell, 
lets  us  a  little  further  behind  the  scenes.  It  is 
quite  clear  that  the  policy  at  first  laid  down  for  The  policy 
Layton  and  Southwell  was  to  procure  successively  p^"'™eci. 
from  individual  monasteries  acknowledgments  that 
they  had  not  fulfilled  the  purposes  for  which  they 
were  founded,  and  that  consequently  their  houses 
and  endowments  might  lawfully  be  resumed  by  the 
King.  Something  of  the  kind  had  evidently  been 
intended  even  at  Lewes,  but  afterwards  was  not 
thought  advisable,  and  the  "  preamble  to  the  deed," 
as  we  have  seen,  was  omitted.  Now,  however,  the 
plan  was  put  in  force,  and  it  was  evidently  thought 
that  the  same  form,  or  nearly  the  same,  would  suit 
the  purpose  in  each  individual  case,  the  documents 
being  so  worded  as  to  show  that  there  was  no 
enforced  suppression,  and  that  each  was  merely  an 
individual  case.  Experience,  however,  showed  that 
some  variation  was  necessary  ;  and  thus  it  is  that 
Southwell  writes  : — 

"  Although,  my  very  good  Lord,"  he  begins,  "  that 
there  wanted  here  some  part  of  the  occasions  compre- 
hended in  the  submission  of  the  late  monastery  of 
Westacre,  as  concerning  the  clear  alienation  of  the 
possessions  belonging  to  the  same,  with  such  like,  yet 
found  we  here  of  other  (that  I  suppose  been  in  the 
more  part  of  the  residue  that  at  this  day  stonden) 
sufficient  enough  for  the  fulfilling  of  the  submission 
that  now  we  send  your  Lordship  in  the  place  of  the 
other  that  wanted,  so  as  by  the  variety  of  occasions 
this  book  in  the  more  part  or  all  is  altered  from  the 
other  in  matter,  as  by  the  perusing  thereof  your 
Lordship  shall  well  perceive,  which  I  humbly  beseech 

^  Wright's  Suppression,  p.  168, 


122  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


BK.  Ill 


you  that  it  may  like  you  to  do.  And  though  it  shall 
seem  tedious,  or  the  over-reading  unworthy,  yet  shall 
I  eftsoons  humbly  beseech  you  to  accept  it  in  good 
part,  and  for  a  perfect  demonstration  of  my  good  ivill 
to  have  made  the  better,  in  case  my  knowledge  had 
extended  thereto."  ^ 

And  a  little  further  on  he  adds  : 
*'  Sir,  these  poor  men  have  not  spared  to  confess 
the  truth,  as  ye  shall  well  perceive,  whereby  in  my 
poor  mind  they  deserve  the  more  favor,  and  I  daresay 
in  their  hearts  [they]  think  themselves  rather  to  have 
merited  pardon  by  their  ignorance  than  praise  or  laud 
for  their  form  of  living." 

We  seem  to  get  a  little  nearer  the  truth  in  that 
last  sentence  than  the  abject  petition  brings  us. 
The  monks  clearly  thought  that  in  the  new  order  of 
things  the  best  they  could  do  was  to  submit  and 
make  terms  for  their  pensions  (which  Southwell 
further  tells  us  that  he  had  arranged  with  them 
"  as  easily  to  the  King's  charge,"  '^  as  he  could 
manage),  and  they  accordingly  confessed  as  much 
as  was  required  of  them,  humiliating  as  the  con- 
fession was.  Still,  it  is  a  mystery  why  Layton 
and  Southwell  alone  were  instructed  to  proceed  in 
this  wise,  for  the  King  had  other  agents  doing 
kindred  work  elsewhere,  and  already,  on  the  29th 
Surrender  January,  the  well-known  abbey  of  Boxley  in  Kent 
Abbef^^  surrendered.^  It  does  not  appear  by  whom  the 
surrender  was  taken,  but  on  Thursday,  the  last  day 
of  the  month,  Walter  Henley,  who  had  just  been 
made  solicitor  of  the  Augmentations  on  the  promo- 
tion of  Robert  Southwell  to  be  attorney  of  that 
court,*  arrived  there  to  survey  the  lands  and  goods 
of  the  monastery  by  order  of  Mr.  Chancellor  Riche, 
and  handed  over  the  property  to  the  keeping  of 
one    Ralph    Fane,    a    servant    of    Cromwell.^       In 

^  Wright's  Suppressio7i,  pp.  171-2.  '  lb.,  p.  173. 

3  X.  P.,  XIII.  i.  173.         ^  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  p.  582.         ^  i^  p,^  xiii.  i.  195,  229. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   123 

making  his  survey  Henley  was  assisted  by  John 
Ashton,  auditor  of  the  same  court,  and  Geoffrey 
Chamber,  receiver-general,  so  that  we  may  presume 
nothing  escaped  examination  which  made  for  the 
King's  purpose.  There  was  an  obvious  intention  to 
destroy  the  credit  of  a  place  to  which  pilgrimages 
had  been  made.  The  monastery  was  defaced  and 
the  images  pulled  down.  Particular  attention  was 
naturally  paid  to  the  famous  "  Eood  of  Grace" — a  The  Rood 
crucifix  in  which  the  eyes  and  nether  lip  had  been  °^^'^'^'^*^- 
made  to  move  by  machinery.  That  there  was  any 
real  deception  about  it  is  by  no  means  evident,  even 
from  the  account  of  Geoffrey  Chamber  himself;  but 
when  the  image  was  loosened  from  the  wall,  and  the 
engines  and  old  wire  and  "  old  rotten  sticks  "  in  the 
back  by  which  the  movements  were  effected,  were 
brought  to  light,  an  excellent  subject  was  obtained 
for  the  denunciation  of  monkish  abuses.  Geoffrey 
Chamber,  indeed,  says  even  at  the  time  that  the 
discovery  was  "  not  a  little  strange "  to  him  and 
others  present ;  but  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  he, 
at  least,  met  with  anything  very  unexpected.  He 
tells  us  something  still  more  strange  when  he  goes  on 
to  say  that  the  abbot  and  some  old  monks  whom  he 
examined  declared  that  they  knew  nothing  of  it.^ 
They  must  certainly  have  known  of  the  performances 
the  figure  had  been  made  in  past  times  to  go  through, 
even  if,  as  has  been  suggested,  it  was  an  old-fashioned 
automaton  long  disused, — a  theory  with  which  the 
"  old  wire  "  and  "  old  rotten  sticks  "  seem  to  agree. 
Perhaps  what  the  abbot  and  the  old  monks  meant 
was,  that  the  apparatus  was  now  so  antiquated  that 
they  really  did  not  know  how  it  had  been  worked. 

Geoffrey  Chamber  knew  well  how  to  use  the  dis- 
covery. Considering,  as  he  says,  the  devotion  paid 
to  the  image  by  the  people  of  Kent  in  times  past, 
he  took  it  with  him  to  Maidstone  on  Thursday  the 

1  L.  p.,  XIII.  i.  231. 


124  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

7th  February,  which  was  a  market-day,  and  showed 
it  to  the  people,  who,  by  his  account,  had  the  matter 
in  wondrous  detestation  and  hatred,  so  that  (he  would 
venture  to  say)  ^  if  the  monastery  had  to  be  defaced 
again  they  would  pluck  it  down  or  burn  it.^  He 
then  brought  the  thing  up  with  him  to  London, 
where  it  was  to  do  some  further  duty.  "  The  Rood  of 
Grace,"  writes  John  Husee  on  the  23rd  to  his  master 
Lord  Lisle,  the  Deputy  of  Calais,  "  shall  stand 
to-morrow  at  Paul's  Cross  during  the  sermon  time, 
and  there  the  abusion  shall  be  divulged."  The 
"  abusion,"  of  course,  was  pretty  well  known  to  all 
intelligent  people,  even  before  it  was  "  divulged,"  and 
Lord  Lisle  at  Calais  understood  perfectly  well  what 
was  meant.  What  ideas  the  ignorant  vulgar  may 
have  entertained  about  it  may,  perhaps,  be  a  question  ; 
but  the  veriest  numskull  could  hardly  have  taken  a 
puppet  for  anything  but  a  puppet,  or  supposed  that  its 
motions  were  controlled  by  anything  but  mechanism. 
Those,  however,  who  hated  monasticism,  or  loved  to 
expose  ecclesiastical  abuses,  were  delighted  at  seeing 
the  work  done  for  them  l^y  authority  of  the  King 
himself.  How  the  promised  exposure  was  actually 
made  we  learn  from  a  letter  written  by  John  Hoker 
of  Maidstone  to  the  Reformer  Bullinger  of  Zurich, 
of  which  the  following  is  a  translation  : — 

Dagon   of   Ashdod  is  everywhere  falling.     That  Bel  of 
Babylon  is  now  broken  to  pieces.     There  was  found  of  late 

^  It  is  perhaps  desirable  to  quote  the  very  words  of  the  letter  : — "  Who,  I 
dare  say,  that  if  the  said  late  monastery  were  to  be  defaced  again  (the  King's 
Grace  not  offended)  they  would  either  pluck  it  down  to  the  ground  or  else 
burn  it ;  for  they  have,  the  said  matter  in  wondrous  detestation  and  hatred, 
as  at  my  repair  unto  your  good  lordship  and  bringing  the  said  image  with 
me, — whereupon  I  do  somewhat  tarry,  and  for  the  further  defacing  of  the 
said  late  monastery, — I  shall  declare  unto  you"  (Ellis's  Original  Letters, 
Third  Series,  iii.  169).  Printed  also  by  Bridgett,  in  Blunders  and  Forgeries, 
pp.  171-2.  When  an  official  of  Henry  VIII.  says  "I  dare  say"  in  a  matter 
like  this,  we  must  not  take  it  for  granted  that  he  is  stating  an  undoubted 
matter  of  fact,  though  of  course  there  were  many  people  among  the  mob  that 
would  readily  have  given  effect  to  his  words. 

"  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  231. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   125 

a  wooden  god  of  the  Kentish  men,  a  hanging  Christ  who 
might  have  vied  with  Proteus  himself.  For  he  knew  well 
how  to  nod  with  his  head,  wink  with  his  eyes,  wag  his  beard, 
bend  his  body  to  reject  and  to  receive  the  prayers  of  those 
who  came  to  him :  This,  while  the  monks  were  falling  on  his 
account,  was  found  in  their  temple,  surrounded  with  a  multi- 
tude of  offerings,  and  enriched  by  gifts  of  linen,  wax  candles, 
&c.  A  sagacious  man,  brother  of  our  Nicholas  Partridge, 
smelt  the  deceit,  and,  fixed  as  it  was  against  the  wall,  he 
loosened  the  image  from  its  place.  The  arts,  the  impostures 
came  to  light,  and  the  wonderful  juggler  is  caught.  There 
were  hidden  pipes  everywhere  in  a  body  full  of  holes,  and  a 
wire  was  drawn  through  the  chinks  by  the  operator,  the  whole 
being  skilfully  concealed  by  thin  plates.  Thus  he  had  made 
a  great  profit  by  deluding  the  people  of  Kent,  indeed  of  all 
England,  for  ages  past.  Being  laid  open,  he  first  offered  a 
spectacle  to  my  people  of  Maidstone,  exhibiting  himself 
from  an  elevated  place  to  a  dense  crowd  of  people,  some 
laughing  heartily,  some  almost  as  mad  as  Ajax.  The  stroller 
was  brought  hence  to  London.  He  visits  the  Court  and  the 
King  himself — a  novel  guest ;  no  man,  indeed,  salutes  him. 
Lords,  dukes,  marquises,  earls,  collect  about  him  with  the 
laughter  of  the  Court.  They  come  from  a  distance,  stand 
round  about  him,  stare  and  look  him  through  and  through. 
He  acts,  he  scowls  with  his  eyes,  he  turns  away  his  face,  he 
distends  his  nostrils,  he  sets  back  his  head,  he  bends  his  back, 
he  assents  and  denies.  They  see,  they  laugh,  they  wonder, 
the  theatre  resounds  with  voices,  the  cry  rises  to  heaven.  It 
is  hard  to  say  whether  the  King  himself  was  more  pleased 
that  the  imposture  was  exposed,  or  grieved  at  heart  that  the 
poor  people  had  been  deluded  for  so  many  years.  What  need 
of  many  words  ?  The  matter  was  referred  to  the  Councillors, 
and  some  days  later  at  London,  the  Bishop  of  Rochester^ 
preached  a  sermon.  The  Kentish  Bel,  set  upon  a  high 
pulpit,  stands  opposite  Daniel.  He  again  opens  himself ;  he 
again  acts  his  part  skilfully  in  public.  They  wonder,  they 
are  enraged,  they  are  stupefied,  ashamed  to  have  been  so 
basely  deceived  by  an  idol.  And  when  the  preacher  grew 
warm  and  the  Word  of  God  secretly  worked  in  the  hearts 
of  the  audience,  they  hurled  the  wooden  trunk  head  foremost 
into  the  thickest  of  the  crowd.  And  now  were  heard  manifold 
cries  of  various  persons ;  it  is  seized,  torn,  rent  in  pieces,  cut 

1  Hilsey. 


126  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

up  into  atoms  and  fragments ;  at  last  it  is  thrown  in  the  fire. 
And  so  he  made  his  end.^ 

This  is  certainly  a  very  artistic  presentation  of 
the  matter,  and  we  must  remember  that  it  was  meant 
for  use  abroad.  The  reader,  for  one  thing,  may  attach 
what  value  he  pleases  to  the  statement  that  the  King 
hardly  knew  whether  more  to  rejoice  at  the  exposure 
or  to  grieve  at  the  long  deception.  That  was  a 
piece  of  information  which  would  go  down  well  at 
Zurich  whither  it  was  addressed.  The  following 
further  statements  contained  in  another  letter  to 
BuUinger  were,  of  course,  intended  for  the  same 
market.  The  writer,  then  living  at  Frankfort,  was 
no  other  than  that  Nicholas  Partridge,  whose  brother 
was  so  active  in  the  business  of  detaching  the  image 
from  the  wall.  So  we  might  presume  that  his  infor- 
mation came  direct  from  an  agent  who  was  anxious 
to  justify  his  conduct.  Yet  he  himself  is  silent  about 
his  brother,  and  gives  no  other  authority  for  his 
statements  than  that  of  an  anonymous  German  : — 

A  certain  German,  who  belongs  to  one  of  the  merchant 
companies  residing  in  London,  has  told  us  marvellous  stories 
respecting  some  saints,  who  formerly  had  fixed  and  immove- 
able abodes  at  a  distance  from  London ;  namely,  that  they 
have  now  ridden  to  London  and  performed  most  astonishing 
things  in  a  numerous  assembly.  Concerning  the  bearded 
crucifix  of  Kent,  called  in  our  language  "  the  Rood  of 
Grace  "  near  Maidstone,  he  told  us  that  while  the  Bishop  of 
Rochester  was  preaching  at  Paul's  Cross  to  a  most  crowded 
congregation  of  nobility  and  others,  in  the  presence,  too,  of 
many  other  famous  saints  of  wood  and  stone,  it  turned  its 
head  about,  rolled  its  eyes,  foamed  at  the  mouth  and  poured 
forth  tears  down  its  cheeks  (!).  The  bishop  had  before 
thundered  forth  against  these  images ;  those  satellite  saints  of 
the  Kentish  image  acted  in  pretty  much  the  same  way.  It 
is  expected  that  the  Virgin  of  Walsingham  and  St.  Thomas 
of  Canterbury,  and  likewise  some  other  images,  will  soon 
perform  their  miracles  in  the  same  place,  which,  of  what 

^  Burnet's  History  of  live,  Reformation  (Pocock's  ed.),  vi.  194-5. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   127 

character  they  are,  you  may,  I  think,  judge  for  yourself.  For 
the  trickery  of  the  wicked  knaves  was  so  publicly  exposed 
in  the  image  of  that  crucifix,  that  every  one  was  indignant 
against  the  monks  and  impostors  of  that  kind,  and  execrated 
both  the  idols  and  those  who  worshipped  them.^ 

The  story  here  has  evidently  grown  in  volume ;  Growth  of 
for  if  the  King's  own  agents  at  Paul's  Cross  managed  *^  legend. 
to  work  such  miracles  with  the  "  idol "  as  to  make  it 
shed  tears  and  foam  at  the  mouth,  they  did  more 
than  the  monks  themselves  are  recorded  ever  to  have 
done.  It  is  interesting,  however,  to  know  from  this 
letter  of  an  Englishman  abroad,  written  on  the  12th 
April,  that  it  was  even  then  expected  that  Our  Lady 
of  Walsingham  and  St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury  would 
likewise  be  brought  to  London  to  give  account  of 
themselves.  They  were  not,  in  fact,  sent  up  till  some 
months  later,  but  the  crusade  against  superstition  was 
even  now  actively  going  on.  On  the  21st  March, 
John  Husee  in  London  writes  to  Lord  Lisle  that 
"  pilgrimage  saints  goeth  down  apace,"  among  others 
Our  Lady  of  Southwick,  the  Blood  of  Hailes,  and  St. 
Saviour's,  Bermondsey  ;  and  on  the  next  day,  writing 
to  Lady  Lisle,  he  tells  her  that  most  of  the  Saints  to 
whom  pilgrimages  and  offerings  were  wont  to  be 
made  were  already  taken  away.  "  I  doubt,"  he  adds, 
**  the  resurrection  will  after."  " 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  story  of  the  final 
exhibition  of  the  Rood  of  Boxley  at  St.  Paul's  has 
not  been  recorded  by  any  eye  -  witness,  and  our 
earliest  information  on  the  subject  is  derived  entirely 
from  letters  written  by  Englishmen  abroad,  or  pre- 
pared by  them  for  a  foreign  market.  But  there  are 
two  other  such  letters  that  refer  to  it,  neither  of 
them  dated  either  as  to  time  or  place,  but  both  of 

^  Original  Letters  (Parker  See),  pp.  609,  610.  The  original  Latin  text  is 
given  in  a  separate  volume  {Epistolce  Tigurince,  pp.  395-6),  and  I  have  ven- 
tured to  correct  a  word  or  two  in  the  translation  to  make  it  more  literal. 

^  L.  P.,  xiii.  i.  564,  580.  Cp.  also  514  ;  and  Wriothesley's  Chrmiicle, 
i.  77. 


128  LOLLARDYAND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

them  written,  no  doubt,  about  the  same  time  as 
Partridge's  letter  and  not  improbably  from  the  very 
same  place,  that  is,  Frankfort.  One  of  the  writers, 
John  Finch,  refers,  like  Partridge,  to  a  German  mer- 
chant as  his  authority,  and  though  he  gives  the  story 
more  fully,  it  looks  rather  as  if  it  came  from  the 
very  same  informant.  The  other  writer,  William 
Peterson,  treats  the  matter  much  more  briefly  ;  but 
a  certain  characteristic  touch  makes  us  suspect  here 
too  a  common  source  of  information.  For  the  words 
of  this  second  writer  are  as  follows  : — 

As  to  the  news  which  you  desire  of  me,  I  have  not  any, 
except  that  the  images  which  formerly  used  to  work  miracles 
in  England,  are  now,  as  I  hear,  broken  in  pieces,  and  the 
imposture  of  the  priests  is  made  known  to  every  one.  And 
to  mention  to  you  one  idol  and  imposture  in  particular,  you 
must  know  that  there  was  in  England  an  image,  which  at 
certain  times  used  to  move  its  mouth  and  eyes,  to  tveep  and 
to  nod  in  sign  of  dissent  or  assent  before  the  bystanders. 
These  things  were  managed  by  the  ingenuity  of  the  priests 
standing  out  of  sight ;  but  the  imposture  is  now  notorious  to 
every  person  in  England.^ 

Surely  it  must  have  been  the  German  merchant 
that  first  credited  the  image  with  shedding  tears. 
Perhaps  John  Finch,  whom  I  now  proceed  to  quote, 
though  he  took  in  a  great  deal  of  the  merchant's 
story,  had  some  discreet  misgivings  about  this  part, 
for  he  does  not  mention  it : — 

A  certain  German  merchant  here,  who  is  well  acquainted 
with  the  English  language,  told  me  as  a  certain  fact  that  all 
the  images  which  used  to  work  miracles  by  the  artifices  of 
the  Devil  and  his  angels,  that  is  to  say,  the  monks,  friars, 
fisheaters,  and  others  of  that  stamp,  were  conveyed  on  horse- 
back to  London  at  the  command  of  the  Bishops ;  that  a 
public  sermon  was  preached  from  the  pulpit  of  St.  Paul's  to 
the  congregation  assembled  in  Christ ;  after  which  a  certain 
image  brought  away  from  Kent,  and  called  in  English  "  the 

1  Original  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  p.  604. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   129 

Rood  of  Grace  in  Kent,"  was  first  exhibited.  The  preacher, 
the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  explained  all  the  trickery  and  im- 
posture in  the  presence  of  the  people.  By  means  of  some 
person  pulling  a  cord,  most  artfully  contrived  and  ingeniously 
inserted  at  the  back,  the  image  rolled  about  its  eyes,  just 
like  a  living  creature ;  and  on  the  pulling  of  other  cords 
it  gave  a  nod  of  assent  or  dissent  according  to  the  occasion. 
It  never  restored  health  to  any  sick  person,  notwithstand- 
ing great  numbers  afflicted  with  divers  diseases  were  carried 
to  it  and  laid  prostrate  before  it,  unless  some  one  disguised 
himself  of  set  purpose  and  pretended  to  be  sick ;  in  which 
case  it  would  give  a  nod,  as  though  promising  the  restoration 
of  health,  that  it  might  by  this  means  confirm  its  imposture. 
Then  again,  by  some  other  contrivance  unknown  to  me  it 
opened  and  shut  its  mouth ;  and,  to  make  an  end  of  my 
story  at  once,  after  all  its  tricks  had  been  exposed  to  the 
people  it  was  broken  into  small  pieces,  and  it  was  a  great 
delight  to  any  one  who  could  obtain  a  single  fragment, 
either,  as  I  suppose,  to  put  in  the  fire  in  their  own  houses, 
or  else  to  keep  by  them  by  way  of  reproof  to  such  kind  of 
impostors.     After  this  Bishop  Latimer,  in  the  West  country ,1 


1  On  reference  to  the  original  in  the  Epistolce  Tigtirince  I  have  altered  the 
translation  of  this  passage,  as  I  think  Dr.  Hastings  Robinson,  who  edited 
these  Zurich  letters  in  English,  was  mistaken  in  supposing  that  the  writer 
was  still  describing  what  was  done  at  St.  Paul's,  and  that  the  words  m 
Occidentali  parte  referred  to  the  west  part  of  the  church.  Bishop  Latimer's 
diocese  was  in  the  west  part  of  the  country.  And  I  am  rather  inclined  to 
suspect  that  the  writer  of  the  letter  himself  made  a  mistake,  attributing  to 
Latimer  what  was  more  probably  the  work  of  his  brother  bishop,  Shaxton  of 
Salisbury,  also  a  western  diocese.  For  the  same  superstition,  with  the 
number  of  oxen  doubled  (which  is  a  trifle),  is  related  of  the  Rood  of  Rams- 
bury  which  was  in  Shaxton's  diocese,  as  we  read  in  a  contemporary  ballad  : — 

"The  swete  Rode  of  Rambisbery 
Twenty  myle  from  Maumbysbery 

"Was  oftimes  put  in  feare  ; 
And  nowe,  at  the  laste. 
He  hath  a  brydling  caste. 

And  is  become  I  wote  not  wheare. 

Yet  hath  it  been  saide 
His  virtue  so  wayde 

That  XVI  oxen  and  mo 
Were  not  able  to  cary 
This  Rode  from  Rambisbery 

Though  he  toke  seven  horses  also. 

"Whiche  is  a  great  lye. 
For,  the  truth  to  trye. 

His  virtue  is  not  worth  a  beane  ; 

VOL.  II  K 


I30  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

carried  in  his  hand  a  small  image  and  threw  it  out  of  the 
church,  though  the  inhabitants  of  that  country  constantly- 
affirmed  that  eight  oxen  would  be  unable  to  remove  it  from 
its  place.  There  were,  after  this,  exhibited  many  other 
tricks  of  the  same  kind,  by  which  the  simple  were  imposed 
upon  by  the  priests ;  so  that  the  ignorant  people  now  call 
them  mere  conjurors,  and  despise  their  contrivances,  object- 
ing the  deceits  they  practised  against  them  as  long  as  the 
tower  of  Babel  was  safe,  which  being  now  undermined,  is 
daily  threatening  an  overthrow.^ 

suence  of  It  is  singulai  that  no  notice  is  taken  of  the  Rood 
temporary  ^f  Boxlcy  either  in  the  contemporary  Chronicle  of 
chroniclers.  Hall  or  by  the  continuator  of  Fabyan,  nor  yet  in  the 
Greyfriars  Chronicle.  We  might  suppose  reasons 
for  its  omission  in  the  last ;  but  Hall  and  Grafton 
were  just  the  sort  of  chroniclers  to  whom  the  story 
of  such  an  exposure  would,  one  would  have  supposed, 
have  been  particularly  agreeable.  The  only  strictly 
contemporary  chronicler  who  notices  it  seems  to  be 
Wriothesley,  who,  however,  supplies  us  with  what  we 
may  presume  to  have  been  the  official  view,  though 
written,  no  doubt,  long  after  the  event.  His  account 
is  in  these  words  : — 

This  year  in  February  there  was  an  image  of  the  crucifix 
of  Christ,  which  had  been  used  of  long  continuance  for  a 
great  pilgrimage  at  the  Abbey  of  Boxley  by  Maidstone  in 
Kent,  called  the  Rood  of  Grace,  taken  from  thence  and 
brought  to  the  King  at  Westminster,  for  certain  idolatry 
and  craft  that  had  been  perceived  in  the  said  Rood ;  for  it 
was  made  to  move  the  eyes  and  lips  by  strings  of  hair,  when 
they  would  show  a  miracle,  and  never  perceived  till  now. 
The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  had  searched  the  said  image 
in  his  visitation,  and  so,  at  the  King's  commandment,  [it] 
was  taken  thence,  that  the  people  might  leave  their  idolatry 
that  had  been  there  used.     Also  the  said  rood  was  set  in  the 

For  one  man  toke  him  downe, — 
From  his  churche  and  towne 
Thre  men  conveyed  him  cleans. " 

This  ballad  is  entitled  "The  Fantassie  of  Idolatrie,"  and  I  shall  speak 
of  it  a  little  further  on. 

1  Original  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  pp.  606,  607. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    131 

market  place,  first  at  Maidstone,  and  there  showed  openly  to 
the  people  the  craft  of  moving  the  eyes  and  lips,  that  all  the 
people  there  might  see  the  illusion  that  had  been  used  in 
the  said  image  by  the  monks  of  the  said  place  of  many  years 
time  out  of  mind,  whereby  they  had  gotten  great  riches  in 
deceiving  the  people,  thinking  that  the  said  image  had  so 
moved  by  the  power  of  God,  which  now  plainly  appeared  to 
the  contrary. 

The  writer,  who  was  in  the  service  of  Lord  Chan- 
cellor Audeley,  undoubtedly  intended  to  justify  what 
was  done  by  authority  and  to  cultivate  popular  pre- 
judice ;  but  though  the  statement  of  the  case  is  not 
in  all  respects  accurate — as,  for  instance,  in  what  is 
said  of  the  archbishop's  visitation — the  details  given 
of  the  "idolatry  and  craft"  are  really  of  a  very 
modest  kind,  and  would  suggest  no  very  elaborate 
artifices  were  it  not  for  the  words,  "  when  they  would 
show  a  miracle,"  and  "  never  perceived  till  now." 
Nor  can  we  attach  much  value  to  suggestions  of  this 
kind,  considering  the  quarter  from  which  they  come. 

The  simplest  statement  of  what  was  done  at  the 
final  exhibition  of  the  image  is  that  of  honest  John 
Stow  the  chronicler,  who  was  always  careful  to 
collect  intelligence,  and  never  wrote  for  effect.  We 
might,  indeed,  almost  reckon  him  among  contem- 
poraries ;  for  he  was  thirteen  years  old  at  the  time 
and,  being  a  regular  Londoner,  very  likely  witnessed 
the  scene.  But  he  betrays  no  excitement  about  it ; 
and  his  sober  record  of  what  took  place  seems  to  con- 
tain all  that  is  really  essential.     It  is  as  follows  : — 

The  24  of  February,  being  Sunday,  the  Rood  of  Boxley 
in  Kent,  called  the  Rood  of  Grace,  made  with  divers  vices  to 
move  the  eyes  and  lips,  was  showed  at  Paul's  Cross  by  the 
preacher,  which  was  the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and  there  it 
was  broken  up  and  plucked  in  pieces.^ 

There  is,  however,  one  point  more  to  be  considered 
in  a  passage  actually  written  at  the  very  time  con- 

^  Stow's  Annals,  p.  575. 


132  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  in 

cerning  this  celebrated  image.  When  Northampton 
Priory  was  surrendered  a  month  later  in  the  manner 
we  have  seen,  Southwell  wrote  to  Cromwell  as 
follows : — 

Whether  there  was  cause  why  that  Boxley  should  re- 
cognise as  much  or  more  it  may  please  you  to  judge,  whom 
it  also  pleased  to  show  me  the  idol  that  stood  there,  in  mine 
opinion  a  very  monstrous  sight.^ 

If  the  monks  of  Boxley  had  been  for  ages  prac- 
tising a  very  gross  deception  upon  the  people,  there 
surely  would  have  been  cause  why  they  should  have 
made  some  such  contrite  submission  as  the  Priory  of 
St.  Andrew,  Northampton  ;  nor  would  it  have  been 
wonderful  if  they  had  really  recognised  "  as  much  or 
more."  But  no  such  submission  seems  to  have  been 
required  of  them ;  and  with  all  the  alleged  indigna- 
tion elicited  by  the  exposure  of  their  jugglery,  it  is 
remarkable  that  not  one  of  them  was  punished  for  it. 
On  the  contrary,  the  abbot  and  his  monks  were  all 
liberally  pensioned^  —  a  fact  which  pretty  clearly 
shows  that  they  made  no  opposition  to  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  abbey.  Opposition,  clearly,  would  have 
been  futile,  and  they  thought  it  well  to  make  the  best 
terms  they  could  for  themselves.  They  disclaimed 
all  responsibility  for  the  automaton  and,  apparently, 
their  claim  was  admitted.  It  was  not  a  manufac- 
ture of  recent  date,  and,  after  all,  we  may  be  pretty 
"The  sure,  it  was  a  very  harmless  piece  of  mechanism. 
^harmless  -^Itliough  a  different  account  of  its  origin  was  pub- 
piece  of  lished,  it  may  not  unlikely  have  been  fashioned  in  old 
mechan-  ^q^jq  \,j  somc  mouk  with  a  mechanical  turn ;  for  in- 
genious pieces  of  mechanism  were  sometimes  made  in 
monasteries.  And  it  would  seem  that  there  were 
both  in  monasteries  and  cathedrals  other  images  not 
altogether  dissimilar  in  character.     As,  for  example, 

^  Wright's  Supp.  p.  172. 

'^  See  Bridgett's  tract,  The  Rood  of  Boxley,  p.  44,  giving  the  amounts  of 
the  pensions. 


ism. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    133 

there  was  at  that  very  time  in  St.  Paul's,  though  not 
brought  up  for  judgment  till  after  Edward  VI. 's 
accession,  "  a  picture  (i.e.  an  image)  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion of  our  Lord,  made  with  vices,  which  put  out  his 
legs  of  sepulchre  and  blessed  with  his  hand,  and 
turned  his  head."  This  with  some  other  images  was 
broken  to  pieces  on  Advent  Sunday  1547,  after  a 
sermon  by  Bishop  Barlow  on  "  the  great  abomination 
of  idolatry  in  images."  ^ 

After  the  surrender  of  St.  Andrew's  monastery  at 
Northampton  the  plan  of  procuring  a  forced  confession 
of  delinquencies  at  the  different  monasteries  appears 
to  have  been  abandoned.  Most  houses,  no  doubt, 
yielded  easily  enough  without  it.  Indeed,  Butley  in 
Suffolk  surrendered  to  Dr.  Petre  on  the  very  same  day 
(1st  March)  ^  that  Northampton  made  its  humiliating 
submission  to  Dr.  Layton  ;  and  besides  these  agents, 
who  travelled  up  and  down  the  country  with  remark- 
able alacrity,  there  were  several  others  engaged  in  the 
work  during  the  whole  of  that  year  and  the  next. 
Surrenders  of  monasteries,  destruction  of  images,  and 
exposure  of  superstitions  were  the  main  doings  of  the 
year  1538  especially.  It  is  not  my  purpose  to  follow 
the  acts  in  detail.  But  there  is  one  notable  monastery 
the  circumstances  of  whose  fall  revealed  touching 
stories  of  what  had  passed  during  the  last  few  years 
within  its  walls ;  and  from  these  we  may  well  infer 
the  similar  painful  struggles  that  took  place  in  many 
other  houses. 

The  Abbey  of  Woburn  surrendered  on  the  8  th  May 
to  Dr.  Legh  and  to  Mr.  Williams,  Master  of  the  King's 
Jewels.  Williams,  it  may  be  mentioned,  had  already 
been  at  Bury  St.  Edmunds  and  elsewhere,  plundering 
shrines  for  the  benefit  of  the  King's  treasury.^  Before  surrender 
taking  their  surrender  the  two  Commissioners  informed  accusaMons 
the    abbot    and   monks   that   they  were   accused    of  against  the 

•'  abbot  and 

1  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  ii.  1.  2  j^  p_^  xiii.  i.  393.  ^^ovks. 

3  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  192,  484. 


134  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

various  crimes,  amounting,  indeed,  to  high  treason ; 
on  which  they  appear  to  have  felt  that  there  was 
nothing  for  it  but  to  address  a  very  humble  submis- 
sion to  the  King,  expressing  their  great  grief  that  any 
such  things  should  be  said  of  them,  and  placing  them- 
selves, their  house,  and  goods,  at  the  King's  mercy/ 
The  charges  were  investigated  at  the  monastery,  four 
days  later,  by  Legh  and  Williams  and  Dr.  Petre,  and 
the  depositions  taken  are  extant.^ 

From  these  it  is  sufficiently  evident  that  there 
were  traitors  among  the  monks — not  traitors  against 
the  King,  but  against  the  abbot  to  whom  they  owed 
obedience.  The  poor  old  abbot — Robert  Hobbes  was 
his  name — had  been  suffering  from  a  painful  disease 
just  before  Easter,  and  had  wished  that  God  would 
take  him  out  of  the  world,  and  that  he  had  died  with 
the  good  men  who  had  suffered  heretofore,  meaning 
Bishop  Fisher,  More,  and  their  fellow-martyrs.  On 
Passion  Sunday  he  exhorted  some  of  the  brethren  to 
charity,  and  he  besought  them  never  to  consent  to 
give  up  the  monastery  or  to  change  their  habits.  The 
question  of  Royal  or  Papal  Supremacy  was  a  sore  one. 
He  had  said  to  the  curate  of  the  Lady  Chapel  at 
Woburn :  "  Sir  William,  I  hear  say  ye  be  a  great 
railer.  I  marvel  that  ye  rail  so.  I  pray  you,  teach 
my  cure  the  scripture  of  God,  and  that  may  be  to 
their  edification.  I  pray  you  leave  such  railing.  Ye 
call  the  Pope  a  bear  and  a  bawson.^  Either  he  is  a 
good  man  or  an  ill.  Domino  suo  stat  aut  cadit.  The 
office  of  a  bishop  is  honorable.  What  edifying  is  this 
to  rail?" 

To  revile  the  Pope,  however,  even  within  the  walls 
of  a  monastery,  was  now  considered  the  part  of  a 
loyal  subject ;  to  call  him  Pope  was  not  permissible. 
Monks,  like  other  people,  must  learn  to  call  him 
"  Bishop  of  Rome,"  and  the  name  of  "Pope"  was  to 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  955,  956,  ^  x.  p.,  xiii.  i,  981. 

*  A  "baw3on  "  meant  a  badger  (animal)  or  an  insolent  person. 


CH.  in  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   135 

be  erased  in  all  service  books.  In  this  duty  Sir 
William,  the  parish  priest  of  Woburn  Chapel,  was  a 
little  too  zealous  for  his  abbot,  who  rebuked  him  for 
using  a  knife  to  rase  the  Pope's  name  out  of  the 
canon,  telling  him  to  do  it  simply  with  a  pen,  for  "  it 
will  come  again  one  day,"  he  said.  Sir  William 
answered  that  in  that  case  they  could  put  it  in  again, 
but  he  trusted  never  to  see  that  day.  Such  language 
pained  the  abbot  extremely.  He  said  that  if  Sir 
William  railed  so  much  against  the  Pope  he  was  no 
meet  chaplain  for  him.  "  It  is  a  perilous  world,"  said 
the  abbot ;  "St.  Bernard  calleth  the  See  of  Rome 
pastor  pastoruTn,  but  now  it  is  of  another  trade." 

Towards  the  close  of  the  year  1537  a  false  report 
of  the  King's  death  had  got  abroad  and  was  general 
over  the  South  of  England  and  some  part  of  the 
Midlands.  Dan  John  Croxton,  otherwise  called  West, 
deposed  to  the  way  it  was  received  within  the  abbey. 
He  had  been  in  the  shaving  house,  he  said,  during  the 
Christmas  holidays  with  Dan  Robert  Woburn  and 
others,  when  Dan  Laurence  Bloneham  reported  that 
the  King  was  dead.  Croxton  answered  at  once  that 
the  King  was  well,  and  advised  Bloneham  "  to  leave 
his  babbling."  Bloneham  replied,  "  Croxton,  it 
maketh  no  matter  what  thou  sayest,  for  thou  art  one 
of  the  new  world."  Croxton  retorted,  "  Thy  babbling 
tongue  will  turn  us  all  to  displeasure  at  length." 
Bloneham  then  said,  "  Neither  thou  nor  yet  any  of 
us  shall  do  well  as  long  as  we  forsake  our  head  of  the 
Church,  the  Pope."  "  By  the  mass,"  replied  Croxton, 
"  I  would  thy  Pope  Roger  were  in  thy  belly  or  thou 
in  his,  for  thou  art  a  false  perjured  knave  to  thy 
Prince."  Bloneham  indignantly  rejoined,  "  By  the 
mass,  thou  liest.  I  was  never  sworn  to  forsake  the 
Pope  to  be  our  head,  and  never  will  be."  "  Then," 
said  the  other,  "  thou  shalt  be  sworn  in  spite  of  thine 
own  heart  one  day,  or  I  will  know  why  nay." 

Sir  William  Sherbourne — that  was  the  name  of  the 


136  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

priest  of  the  Lady  Chapel  above  referred  to — gave 
evidence  himself  before  the  Commissioners.  He  had 
only  possessed  that  benefice  since  midsummer  of  the 
previous  year  (1537),  at  which  time  he  had  a  discus- 
sion with  the  abbot  about  the  refusal  of  the  Germans 
to  attend  the  Council  summoned  to  Mantua.  The 
abbot  gave  him  a  copy  of  the  excuse  offered  by  the 
G-ermans  to  take  to  Sir  John  Mylward  of  Toddington  ^ 
to  examine  and  report  upon.  Mylward  read  it  over, 
and  two  days  later  came  and  said  that  the  Germans 
were  heretics.  How  could  they  be  so,  asked  Sher- 
bourne,  seeing  that  they  owed  no  obedience  to  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  but  only  to  the  Emperor,  who  was 
Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ?  The  Emperor 
had  not,  indeed,  so  proclaimed  himself  as  their  own 
King  had  done  in  England,  but  he  was  so,  and  he  did 
not  disapprove  of  the  Germans  taking  him  for  their 
Supreme  Head.  Sherbourne  also  reported  how  his 
abbot  had  reproved  him  for  speaking  against  the 
Pope's  authority,  and  how  he  had  said  that  the 
Carthusians  and  More  and  Fisher  had  been  taken 
away  in  order  that  naughty  heretics  might  have  their 
swing. 

Sir  John  Mylward's  opinion  on  Church  matters, 
it  thus  appears,  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  abbot. 
Mylward,  as  the  abbot  himself  confessed,  had  once 
lent  him  a  treatise  of  his  own  making,  containing  the 
statements  of  various  weighty  authorities  de  Potestate 
Petri,  which  the  abbot  got  copied  before  returning. 
It  was  sad  for  Abbot  Hobbes  when  these  things  came 
to  light,  and  he  tried  hard  to  show  that  his  meaning 
was  inoffensive.  He  was  accused,  moreover,  of 
neglecting,  when  he  preached,  to  declare  the  King's 
title  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church,  and  he  could 
only  say  that  his  omission  was  not  due  to  malice  but 
only  "for  a  scrupulous  conscience  that  he  then  had, 

^  He  was  master  of  a  hospital  at  Toddington.     See  Valor  Ucclesiasticus, 
iv.  211. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS  137 

considering  tlie  long  continuance  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  in  that  trade  being,  and  the  sudden  mutation 
thereof."  He  was  very  sorry  if  he  had  offended. 
Evidently  he  was  not  a  man  of  the  same  clearness  of 
head  or  firmness  as  Bishop  Fisher  or  Sir  Thomas 
More ;  but  he  felt  with  some  diffidence  what  they  felt 
strongly.  He  had,  indeed,  bent  to  the  prevailing 
tyranny,  and  not  only  acknowledged  the  King's 
supremacy  but  compelled  his  sub-prior,  Dan  Ralph 
Woburn,  to  do  the  same  under  threat  of  sending  him 
up  to  the  Council  if  he  refused.^  Such  was  the  state- 
ment of  the  sub-prior  himself,  who  professed  to  have 
come  afterwards  to  a  better  state  of  mind  by  reading 
such  books  as  Tyndale's  Obedience  of  a  Christian 
Man  and  Tlie  Glass  ofTruth.^  Still,  the  abbot  could 
not  quite  believe  that  royal  supremacy  would  last. 
He  had  only  bent  in  weakness  to  a  power  which  he 
could  not  resist  at  the  time,  but  which  he  believed 
would  pass  away.  But  when  the  news  came  of  the 
deaths  of  the  Carthusians  and  their  fellow-martyrs 
the  terror  inspired  by  their  fate  moved  him  to  acts  of 
no  ordinary  solemnity.  Assembling  the  monks  in 
the  chapter  house,  he  commanded  them  to  repeat  the  a  scene 
psalm  Deus,  venerunt  gentes  (Ps.  Ixxix),  and  said,  J^w  *^^ 
"  Brethren,  this  is  a  parlous  time.  Such  a  scourge 
was  never  heard  sith  Christ's  Passion."  He  added 
that  it  was  certainly  for  their  offences,  and  that  if  they 
repented  God  would  take  vengeance  on  their  enemies 
the  heretics.  The  psalm  was  said  every  Friday, 
with  the  versicle  Exsurgat  Deus,  after  the  Litany, 
the  monks  prostrate  all  the  while  before  the  altar. 

The  poor  abbot  could  hardly  realise  that  even  in 
these  sad  orders  and  acts  of  government  he  was 
making    the    situation    more    difficult   for    himself. 

1  L.  P.,  X.  1239.  This  document  seems  to  be  misplaced  in  1536.  It  must 
surely  be  of  June  1538 — just  a  little  later  than  the  other  depositions. 

-  A  pamphlet  published  by  the  King  in  1531  in  defence  of  his  pleas  that 
marriage  with  a  brother's  wife  was  unlawful  and  that  he  ought  not  to  be  cited 
to  Rome. 


138  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Monks  were  too  well  aware  of  the  state  of  the  world 
outside  their  walls,  and  that  a  new  era  had  begun  in 
which  abbots  were  of  small  account.  What  wonder, 
then,  that  some  of  them  murmured  at  this  new  dis- 
cipline of  humiliation  ?  Disaffection  of  monks  towards 
their  abbot  was  not  half  so  serious  a  thing  as  disaffec- 
tion towards  the  King,  and  expressions  of  sympathy 
with  the  recent  martyrs  were  in  themselves  most 
dangerous  unless  a  whole  convent  were  firmly  united 
not  to  betray  each  other.  Such  was  certainly  not  the 
state  of  matters  at  Woburn.  And  yet  in  another 
year  it  seemed  as  if  the  storm  had  blown  over.  The 
abbot  had  even  friends  at  Court,  or  one  friend,  at 
least,  who,  dissolute  enough  in  life,  and  related  to 
the  haughty  Anne  Boleyn  for  whose  sake  the  world 
had  been  thus  turned  upside  down,  did  not  in  his  heart 
at  all  admire  the  revolution.  This  was  her  cousin.  Sir 
Francis  Brian.  On  Anne's  fall,  he  had  been  sent  for 
by  Cromwell  in  great  haste  "  upon  his  allegiance  "  ; 
but  if  there  was  any  momentary  doubt  that  he  might 
be  involved  in  the  fate  of  his  kinswoman,  it  was  soon 
dispelled.  For  Brian  remained  in  high  credit,  and 
when  the  Court  afterwards  repaired  to  Ampthill 
(apparently  in  September  1536  ^)  he  not  only  invited 
the  Abbot  of  Woburn  to  come  and  visit  him  there, 
but  on  his  arrival  greeted  him,  in  the  presence  of 
Lord  Grey  of  Wilton  and  others,  with  the  words  : 
"  Now,  welcome  home,  and  never  so  welcome  !  "  The 
abbot,  greatly  astonished,  asked  why,  and  he  said  he 
would  explain  at  leisure.  Brian  then  told  him  how 
he  had  cleared  himself,  and  how  friendly  he  found 
Cromwell  to  both  of  them.  "  You  are  much  bound," 
he  told  the  abbot,  ''  to  pray  for  his  lordship."  "  Why 
so  ? "  again  the  abbot  asked,  and  Brian  assured  him 
that  Cromwell  had  spoken  in  his  favour  to  the  King. 

^  The  Court  was  at  Ampthill  at  least  from  the  19th  to  the  28th  September. 
See  L.  P.,  XI.  469,  519  (19,  20,  22),  943  (4,  22).  Even  in  August  Sir  Francis 
had  negotiated  with  the  abbot  for  Cromwell  in  some  matters.     L.  P.,  xi.  326. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    139 

So  now,  it  would  almost  seem,  the  clouds  liad  alto- 
gether dispersed,  and  Brian  congratulated  the  abbot 
as  a  friend. 

But  if  the  abbot's  heart  was  somewhat  lightened, 
as  no  doubt  it  must  have  been  for  a  time,  it  was  by 
the  delusion  which  so  many  shared  that  the  King, 
having  got  rid  of  Anne  Boleyn,  would  now  return  to 
the  communion  of  Rome  and  the  spiritual  unity  of 
Christendom.  Even  when  the  Act  for  the  dis- 
solution of  the  smaller  monasteries  began  to  be  put 
in  execution,  he  was  hopeful  of  better  times.  He 
enjoined  his  monks  to  sing  daily  after  lauds  Salvator 
Mundi,  salva  nos  omnes,  and  to  use  certain  other 
versicles  and  collects  at  every  mass,  assuring  them 
that  if  they  did  so  with  good  and  pure  devotion,  God 
would  so  handle  the  matter  that  it  should  be  to  the 
comfort  of  all  England.  "  And  surely,  brethren,"  he 
added,  "  there  will  come  once  a  good  man  that  will 
re-edify  these  monasteries  again  that  be  now  sup- 
pressed, quia  2^otens  est  Deus  de  lapidihus  istis 
suscitare  filios  Ahrace"  The  progress  of  events, 
unfortunately,  did  nothing  to  encourage  such  beliefs. 
But  even  when  required  to  deliver  up  his  bulls  to 
Dr.  Petre  (for  no  documents  emanating  from  Rome 
were  to  be  allowed  to  remain)  he  had  them  all  copied 
first,  in  order  that  if  by  the  mediation  of  princes  the 
King  should  hereafter  be  reconciled  to  the  Pope,  they 
might  again  be  ratified. 

What  was  his  dismay  in  the  beginning  of  1538 
when  he  found  that  new  suppressions  of  monasteries 
were  taking  place  !  "  Mercy,  God  !  it  is  a  wonderful 
thing,"  he  said,  "that  the  King's  Grace  cannot  be 
content  with  that  his  Parliament  have  given  him,  but 
ever  more  and  more  plucketh  down  the  holy  monas- 
teries which  his  predecessors  and  other  noble  founders 
have  ordained  to  the  honor  of  God  for  their  souls' 
healths,  and  endowed  with  possessions  to  the  intent 
that    religious   persons    should   pray    for    them    and 


140  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

maintain  alms  and  hospitality  for  poor  men.  And 
his  Grace  as  yet  hath  built  no  house  of  prayer,  not  so 
much  as  one  chantry  for  himself,  that  I  know."  Yet 
this,  the  abbot  said,  could  not  come  of  himself,  for  a 
better  prince  to  the  Church  and  Commons  of  his 
realm  never  was;  and  though  the  Lord  Privy  Seal 
(Cromwell)  seemed  to  be  the  maintainer  of  these 
wretched  heretical  books  that  he  set  forth  cum 
privilegio  regali,  neither  the  King  nor  he  knew  the 
pestilent  heresies  contained  in  them.  Thus  did  Abbot 
Hobbes  speak  his  mind  while  trying  not  to  offend. 
As  to  the  suppressions  themselves  he  also  said,  "It  is 
an  unmerciful  thing  thus  to  put  down  the  houses  of 
God  and  expulse  the  inhabitants  from  their  living, 
yea  and  many  one  from  their  life  too."  ^ 

Need  it  be  said  what  became  of  the  abbot  ?     He 

was  tried,  apparently  at  Lincoln,  along  with  Laurence 

Bloneham,  or  Peck,  and  the  sub-prior,  Kalph  Woburn, 

or  Barnes,  and  all  three  received  the  usual  sentence 

The  abbot   for  high  trcason.^     The  abbot  was  hanged,  tradition 

anShers  ^^7^'  *^^  ^^  oak-trcc  in  front  of  his  own  abbey,^  and 

also.  probably  the  others  along  with  him,  as  was  also  a 

Bedfordshire  parson — no  very  near  neighbour  of  theirs 

— John  Henmersh,  vicar  of  Puddington.* 

We  may  now  leave  the  reader  to  picture  for  himself 
what  was  taking  place  within  the  walls  of  many  other 
monasteries  during  the  few  last  years  of  their  exist- 
ence. We  have,  indeed,  no  other  such  touching  records, 
and  the  reason  probably  is  that  there  were  really  but 
few  of  those  houses  in  which  insubordination,  not- 
withstanding all  the  encouragement  it  received,  was 
really  very  prevalent.  For  abbots  and  priors  to  yield 
up  their  houses  was  comparatively  a  small  matter. 

^  All  the  above  information,  except  where  otherwise  noted,  is  from  L.  P. , 
XIII.  i.  981,     The  latter  part  has  been  compared  with  the  MS. 

^  The  entry  of  their  attainder  is  on  the  Controlment  Eoll,  30  Hen.  VIII. 
m.  16  cL,  with  three  notes  in  the  margin  of  "  T'"^  et  S^"  {trahatur  et  suspen- 
datur). 

2  Dodd's  Wohurn,  p.  38. 

*  Gasquet's  Henry  VIII.  and  the  English  Monasteries,  ii.  202. 


CH.  in  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   141 

To  yield  quietly  when  resistance  can  do  no  good  is 
the  part  of  common  sense,  and  stern  duty  itself  can 
have  little  to  say  against  it.  Monasteries,  even  when 
fully  tolerated,  were  often  heavily  burdened  with  debt ; 
and  when  hemmed  in  with  new  restrictions  by  a  power 
which  could  not  be  withstood,  it  is  no  wonder  that 
the  abbots  and  priors  consented,  without  more  ado, 
simply  to  give  up  their  trusts.  The  work  was  going  Progress  of 
on  rapidly  now  in  this  year,  1538,  and  continued  to  p^essbn. 
go  on  steadily  during  the  next  year  as  well,  till  the 
three  great  abbots  who  would  not  surrender,  having 
each  gone  through  the  form  of  a  trial,  though  his 
execution  was  determined  beforehand,  were  hanged, 
each  apparently  close  to  his  own  monastery,  as  a 
quiet  warning  of  what  was  to  be  expected  by  any 
others  who  should  dare  to  oppose  the  King's  will.  In 
the  course  of  little  more  than  two  years  every  one  of 
the  larger  monasteries  was  suppressed. 

No  less  successful  was  the  King's  crusade  against 
superstition,  so  triumphantly  begun  by  the  exposure 
and  destruction  of  the  curious  toy  of  Boxley.  When 
Bishop  Hilsey  preached  on  that  occasion  at  Paul's 
Cross  he  was  careful  to  show  in  his  sermon  "  how 
other  images  in  the  Church  used  for  great  pilgrimages 
hath  caused  great  idolatry  to  be  used  in  this  realm, 
and  showed  how  he  thinketh  that  the  idolatry  will 
never  be  left  till  the  said  images  be  taken  away  and 
that  the  boxes  that  they  have  to  gather  the  devotions 
of  the  people  were  taken  away  first,  so  that  they 
should  have  nothing  used  to  put  the  charity  of  the 
people  in  ;  but  if  there  were  any  persons  that  would 
offer  to  such  images,  that  the  said  offering  might  be 
given  incontinent  to  poor  people,  and  that  the  people 
should  be  showed  how  they  should  offer  no  more  to 
the  said  images.  He  doubted  not  but  then  in  short 
time  they  would  grant  that  the  said  images  might  be 
taken  away.  Also  he  said  how  he  confessed  a  woman 
twenty  years  ago  in  Oxford,  which  woman  was  the 


142  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

miller's  wife  by  the  Abbey  of  Hailes,  in  Gloucester- 
shire, and  how  she  showed  him  how  the  abbot  of  the 
same  place  had  given  her  many  jewels  that  had  been 
ofifered  there  at  the  Holy  Blood  " — a  precious  phial 
containing,  as  was  supposed,  the  blood  of  Christ — 
"  and  how  he  would  have  given  her  one  jewel  which 
The  she  knew  very  well  hanged  about  the  said  Holy 
of  Hailes.  Blood,  and  said  to  the  abbot  that  she  would  not  have 
that  because  she  was  afraid,  because  it  hanged  by 
the  Holy  Blood.  And  the  abbot  said,  '  Tush,  thou 
art  a  fool,  it  is  but  a  duck's  blood.'  And  this  the 
said  bishop  showed  that  it  was  true,  as  he  besought 
God  he  might  be  damned  if  it  were  not  so  as  he  said  ; 
and  also  how  he  had  showed  the  King  and  the 
Council  of  the  same,  and  that  it  should  be  known 
more  openly  afterward."  ^ 

Whatever  opinion  we  may  be  inclined  to  form  of 
the  veracity  of  Bishop  Hilsey  in  reporting  this  dis- 
graceful anecdote  to  the  multitude,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  at  all  as  to  the  object  with  which  it  was  done. 
Hilsey  was  already,  and  had  long  been,  fully  com- 
mitted to  the  King's  service,  not  as  a  mere  loyal 
subject,  but  as  one  of  the  two  Royal  Visitors  of  the 
Orders  of  Friars — that  is  to  say,  he  filled  a  post  which 
could  only  be  filled  by  a  zealous  supporter  of  royal 
supremacy  and  opponent  of  papal  authority.  His 
object  was  to  promote  the  King's  Church  policy  in 
this  war  against  superstitious  relics ;  and  if  the 
disclosure — nay,  the  open  publication  of  an  alleged 
confession  made  to  him  as  priest — could  be  of  any 
use  in  this  way,  he  was  not  the  man  to  stick  at  a 
trifle  from  considerations  of  mere  delicacy.  The 
woman,  indeed,  and  the  wicked  abbot  himself,  may 
both  have  been  dead,  and  the  disclosure  not  altogether 
illicit  by  the  rules  of  the  confessional,  supposing  that 
the  story  itself  was  true ;  but  it  could  hardly  be 
considered  edifying  or  beneficial  to  public  morality. 

.     ^  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  75,  76. 


CH.  in  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS  143 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  tale  was  a  fiction — which, 
in  spite  of  the  bishop's  strong  asseveration  to  the 
contrary,  may  appear  not  incredible, — it  was  assuredly 
well  devised  for  depreciating  the  relic  as  much  as 
possible,  and  even  more  than  was  altogether  right. 
For,  as  will  be  seen  hereafter,  the  liquid  inside  the 
phial  certainly  was  not  a  duck's  blood,  whatever  it 
was ;  and  though  an  immoral  abbot  may  possibly 
have  cared  little  about  its  real  character,  we  can 
hardly  imagine  even  such  a  one  giving  away  with  a 
light  heart  an  object  so  highly  esteemed,  with  an 
excuse  which  none  but  a  ribald  scofifer  would  have 
dared  to  utter. 

The  existing  Abbot  of  Hailes,  Stephen  Sagar,  was 
not  a  man  to  countenance  superstition.  About  this 
time  he  came  up  to  London,  first,  as  he  told  Cromwell 
in  writing,  personally  to  thank  him  for  persistent  acts 
of  kindness,  one  of  which  seems  to  have  been  recom- 
mending him  to  the  King  as  a  royal  chaplain ;  ^ 
secondly,  to  express  his  satisfaction  that  he  lived  in  a 
time  of  enlightenment  when  the  King  had  done  so 
much  to  promote  the  true  honour  of  God ;  and  thirdly, 
most  of  all,  out  of  perplexity  what  to  do  about  this 
celebrated  relic.  He  durst  not  put  it  away  of  his 
own  authority,  and  he  was  afraid  lest  he  should  be 
suspected  of  having  at  times  changed  the  liquid  in 
the  phial,  renewing  it  with  drake's  blood.  Whether 
he  wrote  this  before  or  after  Bishop  Hilsey's  sermon 
does  not  appear ;  but  the  double  suggestion  by  abbot 
and  by  bishop,  of  the  blood  of  a  duck  or  drake,  shows 
sufiiciently  the  kind  of  suspicion  that  might  easily  be 
imputed,  and  which,  in  fact,  was  very  often  expressed 
by  the  irreverent.  The  abbot  protested  that  the 
liquid  had  never  been  renewed  to  his  knowledge,  and 
that  it  had  been  kept  for  nearly  forty  years  by  a 
monk  who  was  almost  eighty,  and  who  would  make 
the  same  answer.^     Nor  is  there  any  reason  to  doubt 

1  L.  p.,  XII.  i.  1323.  2  2;.  p.,  XIII.  i.  347. 


144  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

the  statement,  for  it  was,  in  truth,  a  relic  some 
centuries  old,  and  not  unlikely  to  have  come  from 
the  Holy  Land,  as  one  of  its  greatest  revilers  said 
it  had  done.^ 

The  abbot's  journey  to  London,  however,  was  not 
a  little  due  to  another  cause  which  he  omitted  to 
mention  in  his  letter  to  Cromwell.  His  bishop  had 
evidently  spoken  to  him  on  the  subject  of  the  relic, 
and  his  bishop  was  Latimer.  Some  time  after  his 
return  home  Latimer  wrote  of  him  to  Cromwell  by  the 
ugly  designation  of  "  the  Bloody  Abbot,"  insinuating 
that  he  had  an  eye  to  the  precious  things  in  his  abbey, 
a  good  portion  of  which  he  seems  to  have  pawned  to 
pay  the  expenses  of  his  journey.  Latimer  accordingly 
warned  Cromwell  to  see  to  it  lest  all  the  jewels  of 
the  house  should  be  thus  "surveyed"  away  without 
his  knowledge.^  Cromwell,  however,  required  little 
warning  in  matters  of  this  kind.  The  abbot  had 
already  given  a  private  undertaking  to  surrender  his 
monastery  when  required,  and  before  his  return  from 
London  Dr.  Layton  had  compelled  him  to  give  a  bond 
of  £500  that  he  would  alienate  no  movables,  and 
make  no  grant  under  the  convent  seal  from  the 
date  of  this  "  privy  surrender."  ^  After  he  had 
returned  to  Hailes  he  wrote  to  Cromwell  to  thank 

^  William  Thomas,  who  was  clerk  of  the  Council  under  Edward  VI.,  and 
was  beheaded  under  Mary  for  an  attempt  against  the  Queen's  life,  writes  thus 
in  his  book  called  The  Pilgrim,  edited  by  Froude  in  1861  :  "In  a  certain 
monastery  called  Hailes  there  was  a  great  offering  to  the  Blood  of  Christ, 
brought  thither  many  years  agone  out  of  the  Holy  Land "  (p.  38).  This, 
perhaps,  may  have  been  true  as  to  the  origin  of  the  relic  ;  for  it  was  procured 
in  Germany  in  1267  by  Edmund,  Earl  of  Cornwall,  who  brought  it  to  England 
with  a  written  account  of  it  drawn  up  by  Pope  Urban  IV.  See  Dugdale's 
Monasticon,  v.  686.  Whether  the  monks  were  guilty  of  the  trick,  imputed 
to  them  on  p.  39,  of  turning  the  glass  to  show  a  thick  side  or  a  thin,  as 
they  proposed  to  work  on  the  superstitious  fears  of  a  beholder,  I  do  not 
undertake  to  say.  But  the  utter  dishonesty  of  the  following  passage  deserves 
to  be  noted  :  ' '  And  what  blood,  trow  you,  was  this  ?  These  monks  (for 
there  wei'e  two  especially  and  secretly  appointed  to  this  office)  every  Saturday 
killed  a  duck  and  revived  therewith  this  consecrated  blood,  as  they  themselves 
confessed,  not  only  in  secret,  but  also  openly,  and  before  an  approved  audience." 
How  untrue  this  was  we  shall  see  presently.  But  this  story  Thomas  expressly 
says  that  he  propagated  in  Italy. 

2  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  186.  3  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  481. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    145 

him  for  his  "  inestimable  goodness,"  and  to  urge  again 
his  perplexity  about  the  relic.  The  case  which  con- 
tained "the  Blood"  still  stood  where  it  did  in  the 
fashion  of  a  shrine,  and  he  feared  it  might  cause  abuse 
to  weak  consciences.  He  begged,  therefore,  that  he 
might  be  allowed  to  put  it  down  "  every  stick  and 
stone,"  so  as  to  leave  no  remembrance  of  "  that  forged 
relic  "  as  long  as  the  King  was  pleased  that  the  house 
should  stand.  The  silver  and  the  gold  in  it,  he  said, 
were  not  worth  £40,  scarcely  £30.^ 

The  answer  to  this  was  a  commission  issued  by  the 
King  on  the  4th  October  to  Bishop  Latimer,  Prior 
Holbeche  of  Worcester,  the  abbot  himself,  and  Richard 
Tracy,  to  examine  and  report  upon  the  relic.  They 
accordingly  held  an  investigation  on  the  28th  October, 
in  the  presence,  as  they  wrote,  of  a  great  multitude  of 
people.  The  Blood,  by  their  report,  "  was  enclosed 
within  a  round  beryl,  garnished  and  bound  on  every 
side  with  silver."  Latimer  himself  wrote  that  it  was 
"  wondrously  closely,  and  craftily  enclosed  and  stopped 
up."  They  had  it  opened  before  the  people,  and  taken 
out  of  the  beryl,  when  it  was  found,  on  close  examina-  its  nature 
tion,  to  be  "  an  unctuous  gum  coloured."  In  the  ''^^™i'^^*i- 
glass  it  had  certainly  looked  red  and  somewhat  like 
blood,  but  taken  out  of  the  glass  it  was  yellow  like 
amber.  So  it  was  clearly  not  duck's  blood,  nor  any 
blood  at  all.  It  stuck  like  gum  or  bird-lime.  The 
Commissioners  enclosed  it  in  red  wax,  sealed  with  their 
seals,  and  locked  it  in  a  coffer,  leaving  it  in  the 
abbot's  custody  under  indenture,  and  giving  the 
key  to  Richard  Tracy  till  the  King's  pleasure  was 
known  what  to  do  further.  In  due  course  they 
were  instructed  to  send  it  up  to  London,  which 
Latimer  accordingly  did,  but  what  became  of  it  there 
we  are  not  informed.-  Presumably  it  was  simply 
thrown  away. 

Relics  and  images  had  been  coming  up  to  London 

1  L.  P.,  xiir.  ii.  409.  2  i^  p^  xiii.  ii.  709,  710,  856. 

VOL.   II  L 


146  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

that  year  in  considerable  profusion.  Soon  after  the 
destruction  of  the  Rood  of  Grace  and  the  removal  of 
various  other  images  of  "  pilgrimage  saints,"  it  was 
expected  that  images,  even  of  Our  Lady  of  Walsing- 
ham  and  St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury,  would  likewise 
be  sent  up  to  perform  miracles  before  a  London 
audience,^  and  in  the  course  of  a  few  months  they 
were  certainly  sent  up  at  least.  Nor  was  the  spring 
well  over  before  a  very  notable  example  had  been  made 
of  a  great  image  from  North  Wales  which  in  that 
country  had  attracted  superstitious  reverence.  Hun- 
dreds of  pilgrims  had  come  in  a  single  day  to  make 
The  image  offering's  to  Darvelgadarn,  of  kine,  oxen,  horses,  or 

TV  1  •  7  7  7 

gadarn  Hioncy.  It  was  Said  that  he  was  powerful  even  to 
fetch  damned  souls  out  of  hell ;  and  Mr.  Elis  Price, 
whom  Cromwell  had  appointed  Commissary-General 
for  the  diocese  of  St.  Asaph,  felt  that  he  could  not 
but  consult  his  lordship  how  to  correct  such  a  gross 
abuse.  In  three  weeks  he  received  an  answer,  and 
in  spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  the  parson  and 
parishioners,  who  offered  him  £40  to  let  the  image  re- 
main, he  took  it  down  and  had  it  forwarded  to  London.^ 
Here  it  had  a  very  special  part  to  play,  not  merely 
as  an  example  of  superstition,  but  as  the  means 
used  of  punishing  in  one  case  disloyalty  to  the 
King's  religion.  To  explain  the  matter,  however, 
we  must  part  company  with  Darvelgadarn  for  a 
moment. 
story  of  In  years  past  John  Forest,  one  of  the  Franciscan 

Forest  friars  of  Greenwich,  had  been  Queen  Katharine's  con- 
fessor, and  of  course  was  entirely  opposed  both  to  the 
King's  divorce  and  to  the  Royal  Supremacy.  But 
early  in  1533,  when  Anne  Boleyn's  star  was  in  the 
ascendant,  Richard  Lyst,  a  false  brother  in  the  con- 
vent, seeking  Court  favour,  reported  to  Cromwell  his 
"  unkindness  and  duplicity"  towards  the  King.  Crom- 
well then  called  Forest  before  him,  but  did  not  succeed 

1  i.  p.,  XIII.  i.  754.  2  x_  p^^  XIII.  i.  694,  863,  864. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   147 

in  making  liim  tractable.  A  Frenchman  newly 
elected  provincial  of  the  Grey  Friars  was  spoken  to, 
and  Friar  Forest  was  removed  to  a  distant  house  of 
the  same  Order.^  In  1534  he  was  probably  in  the 
Tower  with  Abell,  Queen  Katharine's  chaplain,  when 
they  wrote  to  each  other  letters  of  encouragement 
and  religious  consolation."  He  wrote  also  from  his 
prison  to  Queen  Katharine,  expressing  his  determina- 
tion to  die  for  his  religion,  which  he  expected  soon  to 
do.  And  Katharine  wrote  to  him  in  the  like  spirit, 
deeply  regretting  to  lose  her  beloved  spiritual  father, 
whom  she  would  rather  precede  than  follow^  in  his 
martyrdom.  He  was  not,  however,  destined  imme- 
diately to  meet  his  fate ;  and  when  the  Observants 
were  suppressed  in  the  autumn  of  1534,  he  seems  to 
have  been  treated  like  the  rest  of  that  Order  who 
opposed  the  King — handed  over  to  the  custody  of 
that  other  branch  of  the  Franciscans  called  the  Con- 
ventuals, who  were  less  rigid  in  adhering  to  the 
original  rule  of  St.  Francis.  In  the  houses  of  these 
Conventuals  the  Observants  were  kept  in  irons,  suf- 
fering torments  at  the  hands  of  brethren,  worse,  as 
it  was  reported,  than  those  of  ordinary  prisons.^ 

Forest  was  placed  in  the  London  house  of  Con- 
ventuals. There  his  constancy  for  a  time  gave  way. 
He  disowned  the  authority  of  the  Pope,  and  was 
placed  at  ease.  He  resumed  his  old  functions  and 
heard  confessions.  But  new  difficulties  arose  when 
he  had  to  give  spiritual  advice  to  others.  Was 
Royal  Supremacy  right  in  spiritual  things  ?  Had 
More  and  Fisher  and  the  Carthusians  deserved  their 
fate  as  traitors,  or  earned  an  undying  crown  as  martyrs? 

1  L.  P.,  VI.  116,  168,  ;J09,  334,  .'.12. 

"  L.  P.,  VII.  129-34.  Abell's  letter,  No.  133,  must  have  been  written, 
apparently,  not  at  the  end  of  January,  as  suggested  by  the  reference  in  the 
footnote,  but  Liter.  He  was,  indeed,  committed  to  custody  at  Bugden  on 
the  19th  December  1533,  but  he  was  not  lodged  in  the  Tower  till  the  24th 
February  1534  {L.  ]\,  viii.  1001),  and  if  he  had  been  there  thirty-seven  days 
he  must  have  been  writing  on  the  1st  April. 

3  L.  P.,  VII.  1095  (p.  425). 


148  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Forced  thus  to  consider  the  question  anew,  he  felt  no 
doubt  about  the  answer.  Those  men  had  died  for  the 
cause  of  the  Church  like  St,  Thomas  of  Canterbury, 
and  he  had  no  doubt  their  souls  were  in  heaven. 
How,  then,  could  he  excuse  himself,  or  explain  him- 
self even,  to  his  own  penitents,  who  knew  that  he 
had  renounced  the  Pope's  authority  ?  He  himself 
was  driven  to  confess  to  them,  and  told  one  of  them, 
who  revealed  the  fact  on  examination,  "  that  he  had 
denied  the  Bishop  of  Rome  by  an  oath  given  by  his 
outward  man,  but  not  in  the  inward  man."  He 
acknowledged  a  double  obedience,  to  the  King  by  the 
law  of  God,  and  to  the  Pope  by  his  rule ;  but  he 
urged  men  in  confession  to  remain  steadfast  to  the 
old  faith  ;  and  when  there  was  a  talk  of  friars  being 
compelled  by  the  King  to  change  their  habits,  he  had 
expressed  his  opinion  that  he  might  not  lawfully  do 
so  at  the  King's  commandment,  but  only  at  the 
Pope's.  When  he  said  that  he  believed  in  the 
Catholic  Church,  he  understood  that  Church  to  be 
the  Church  of  Rome.^ 

These  things  came  out  upon  inquiry,  and  he  was 
proceeded  against  for  what  was  now  accounted  heresy. 
Declaring  that  he  would  abide  by  the  judgment  of 
the  Church,  he  submitted  to  various  examinations, 
and  abjured  before  Cranmer  at  Lambeth  on  the  8th 
May.  He  was  then  ordered  to  do  public  penance  at 
Paul's  Cross  on  the  following  Sunday,  the  12th,  when 
Bishop  Latimer  was  to  preach  the  sermon.  But 
meanwhile  he  intimated  that  he  would  not  undergo 
the  penances,  and  when  the  day  arrived  no  per- 
suasions could  induce  him  to  do  so.  He  was  then 
committed  to  Newgate  till  the  22nd,  when  he  was 
brought  to  Smithfield  with  the  alternative  either  to 
abjure  or  to  be  burned.  Latimer  again  was  there  to 
preach  before  him  ;   but  after  the  sermon  he  declared 

1  L.   P.,   XIII.   i.    880,   1043  ;    Hall's    Chronicle,  p.  825  ;    Wriothesley's 
Chronicle,  i.  78,  79. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   149 

that  an  angel  from  heaven  could  not  persuade  him 
now  to  believe  otherwise  than  he  had  believed  all  his 
life.  He  even  told  Bishop  Latimer  to  his  face,  and 
with  undoubted  truth,  that  seven  years  before  that 
time  he  would  never  have  dared  to  preach  in  the 
way  he  had  just  done.^ 

He  was  not  tied  to   a  stake,  as  was  usual  with 
heretics.     He  was  suspended  by  iron  chains  from  a 
pair  of  gallows,  and  beneath  him  was  placed  the  great 
wooden  image,   Darvelgadarn,  an   eftigy  of  a    man-  Heisbumt 
at-arms  with  a  little  spear  in  his  hand  and  a  casket  '^S!'^^ 
of  iron   hanging  from  his  neck  by  a  riband.     The  gadam. 
image  was  then  set  on  fire,  and  Forest  was  burned  in 
the  same  flame.     The  place  of  the  execution  had  been 
carefully  railed  round  to  bar  out  the  vast  crowd  which 
came  to  witness  the  spectacle,  and  the  Lords  of  the 
Council,  and  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  London, 
with  other  gentlemen,  beheld  it  from  a  long  scaffold 
erected  near  St,  Bartholomew's  Hospital  Gate." 

The  war  against  images,  it  seems,  was  taken  up  by 
the  mob,  and  that  same  night  after  midnight,  "  the 
Rood  at  St.  Margaret  Pattens  by  Tower  Street,  was 
broken  all  in  pieces,  with  the  house  he  stood  in,  by 
certain  lewd  persons,  Flemings  and  Englishmen,  and 
some  persons  of  the  said  parish."  ^ 

What  wonder   if    "  lewd  persons "   went   beyond 
what  was  strictly  legal  or  expressly  authorised  ?     In 
June,  Latimer  wrote  to  Cromwell  about  the  image  of 
the  Virgin  in  his  Cathedral :  "  I  trust  your  Lordship 
will  bestow  our  great  Siljyl  to  some  good  purpose,  ut 
pereat  memoria  cum  sonitu.      She  hath   been    the 
Devil's  instrument  to  bring  many,  I  fear,  to  eternal  The  image 
fire.     Now  she  herself,  with  her  old  sister  of  Walsing-  ^.^^^  ^^ 
ham,  her  young  sister  of  Ipswich,  with  their  other  Worcester. 
two  sisters  of  Doncaster  and  Penrice,*  would  make  a 

1  L.  P.,  I.  687,  897  ;  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  78-80. 

-  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  80,  81  ;  Hall,  p.  826. 

^  Wriothesley,  i.  81. 

•*  In  Glamorganshire,  another  image  to  which  pilgrimages  were  made. 


ISO  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


other 

images 
sout  up  to 
London. 


jolly  muster  in  Smitlifield ;  tliey  would  not  be  all 
day  in  burning."  ^  That  the  worship  of  images 
which  had  so  long  prevailed  was  sinful,  as  being 
nothing  less  than  the  idolatry  forbidden  in  the 
Decalogue,  had  always  been  the  teaching  of  the 
Lollards,  and  Lollardy  was  coming  into  favour  now, 
though  it  was  no  longer  called  by  that  name.  As  a 
mere  school  of  thought  it  was  tolerated  under  the 
name  of  "  tlie  New  Learning  "  ;  and  it  was  sufficiently 
popular  to  give  the  King  some  support  in  measures 
for  the  robbery  of  shrines,  the  destruction  of  images, 
and  the  putting  down  of  pilgrimages.  Not  that 
there  was  any  idea  at  this  time  of  a  general 
destruction  of  images ;  but  where  they  had  been 
decked  with  costly  jewels  and  become  the  objects 
of  pilgrimage,  the  King's  treasury  was  manifestly 
capable  of  being  enriched  by  their  removal. 

In  July  came  the  time  that  Latimer  had  been 
looking  forward  to,  when  Our  Lady  of  Walsingham 
and  Our  Lady  of  Ipswich  were  both  sent  up  to 
London ; "  and  next  month  Cromwell  sent  down 
orders  into  Wales  for  the  removal  of  the  image  of 
Penrice  "  as  secretly  as  might  be."  ^  It  was  not 
expedient,  evidently,  to  do  such  things  openly.  This 
image,  too,  was  sent  up  to  London,  and  about  the 
same  time  those  of  St.  Anne  of  Buxton,  in  Derby- 
shire,  and    St.  Modwen    of  Burton-on -Trent.      One 

^  Latimer's  Remains,  p.  395  (Parker  Society).  A  year  before,  Latimer,  as 
bishop,  had  caused  the  image  to  be  stripped  of  its  jewels  and  ornaments.  On 
which  one  Thomas  Emans  addressed  it,  "Lady,  art  tliou  stripped  now ?  I 
have  seen  the  day  that  as  clean  men  hath  been  stripped  at  a  pair  of  gallows 
as  were  they  that  stripped  thee."  He  then  entered  the  chapel,  said  his 
prayers,  and  told  the  people,  "  Ye  that  be  disposed  to  offer,  the  figure  is  no 
worse  than  it  was  before,  and  the  lucre  and  profit  of  this  town  is  decayed 
through  this"  [L.  P.,  xii.  ii.  587).  The  story,  which  the  editor  of  Latimer's 
Remains  cites  from  Herbert's  Henry  VIIL,  that  Our  Lady  of  Worcester,  when 
stripped,  turned  out  to  be  the  statue  of  some  bishoji,  does  not  well  agree 
with  this.  It  was  certainly  a  mere  piece  of  scandal,  the  source  of  which 
may  be  traced  to  a  very  dishonest  document  described  in  L.  P.,  xiv.  i.  402  (p. 
155)  as  an  "  Official  Account  of  the  Reformation."  This  document  will  be 
found  in  Collier's  Church  History  (Records,  No.  xlvii. ),  the  passage  in  question 
being  printed  at  p.  170  in  vol.  ix.  (ed.  1841). 

2  L.  P.,  xiir.  i.  1376,  1501.  ^  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  345. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS  151 

Sir  William  Basset,  a  local  gentleman,  spoken  of  as 
a  servant  of  Cranmer's,  had  been  very  active  in  those 
parts,  and,  on  receipt  of  instructions  from  Cromwell, 
had  not  only  taken  charge  of  those  two  images  and 
sent  them  up,  but  had  "  defaced  the  tabernacles  where 
they  stood,"  taken  away  the  "  crutches,  shirts,  and 
sheets  with  wax  offered,"  charging  the  keepers  to 
allow  no  more  offerings  to  be  made,  and,  as  a  final 
measure,  had  locked  up  and  sealed  the  baths  and 
wells  of  Buxton  that  none  might  bathe  there  till  he 
had  word  of  Cromwell's  pleasure.  All  to  put  an  end 
to  the  "  fond  trust "  people  had  in  those  images ! 
Rheumatic  patients  were  to  be  debarred  the  use  of 
those  beneficial  waters,  because  there  was  superstition 
mixed  up  with  it.^ 

In  the  beginning  of  September  a  far  more  notable 
act  was  done,  alike  to  enrich  the  King's  treasury  and 
to  outrage  the  most  cherished  sentiments  connected 
with  objects  of  this  kind.  Of  all  pilgrimages  in  Eng- 
land, of  all  pilgrimages,  it  might  be  said,  in  the  whole 
world,  what  one  was  more  celebrated  than  that  which 
formed  the  subject  of  Chaucer's  Canterhury  Tales  ? 
Of  all  shrines  in  Christendom  what  one  was  more 
astonishingly  rich  and  beautiful  than  that  of  St, 
Thomas  of  Canterbury?  It  was  the  marvel  of  all 
Europe,  enriched  with  costly  gifts  of  English  gentlemen 
and  foreign  princes.  At  the  very  end  of  August  it 
had  been  visited  and  wondered  at  by  Madame  de 
Montreuil,  a  lady  who  had  gone  to  Scotland  w^ith 
James  V.  in  the  suite  of  his  first  Queen,  Madeleine,  and 
was  then  returning  to  France.  Great  attentions  were 
paid  her  by  official  persons,  and  she  was  shown  both 
the  shrine  and  the  head  of  the  Saint  himself.^  A 
week  later  the  work  of  pillaging  and  destruction  had  Spoliation 
begun.  According  to  Sanders,  the  gold,  silver,  and  °irhfe^^*'^ 
precious  stones  from  the  shrine  filled  six-and-twenty 
large  ox-wagons,  as  the  King's  receiver  had  acknow- 

1  L.  p.,  XIII.  ii.  244,  2-,6.  "^  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  257. 


152  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

ledged,  and  it  was  certainly  reported  at  the  time 
that  at  least  twenty  cart-loads  were  carried  from 
Canterbury  to  London.  But  apparently  all  this  could 
not  have  been  from  the  shrine  alone,  which  contained 
no  silver  at  all,  gold  being  the  least  valuable  material 
in  it.  Stow  says  that  the  spoils  of  the  shrine  filled 
two  great  chests,  so  heavy  that  it  was  all  six  or 
seven  strong  men  could  do  to  convey  one  of  them 
out  of  the  church  at  a  time.  The  value  of  the  whole 
booty  is  faintly  suggested  by  a  payment  at  this 
time,  duly  entered  in  a  book  of  royal  expenses,  of 
£23  :  16s.,  partly  for  rewards  to  monks  and  officers 
of  the  Cathedral,  partly  to  servants  and  labourers 
"travailing  about  the  diso^arnishinor  of  a  shrine" 
there.  ^ 

The  spoliation  of  such  a  famous  shrine  must 
certainly  have  appeared  to  Englishmen,  as  it  did  to 
foreigners,  a  peculiar  scandal.  But  if  we  are  to 
believe  a  story  reported  on  high  authority  abroad, 
Henry  had  taken  a  very  extraordinary  step  to  justify 
the  outrage.  He  had  called  the  dead  Saint  before 
some  tribunal,  and  had  him  pronounced  contumacious 
for  non  -  appearance  and  condemned  as  a  traitor ! 
If  anything  like  this  took  place,  of  course  it  was  a 
piece  of  solemn  mockery  ;  nor  is  there  any  authentic 
record  of  the  process.  There  has,  indeed,  been  pub- 
lished the  text  of  such  a  citation  and  of  such  a  judg- 
ment ;  but  the  documents  bear  distinct  evidences  of 
fabrication.  Still,  the  story  must  not  be  too  lightly 
dismissed ;  for,  strange  as  the  process  may  seem, 
something  of  the  sort  might  really  have  seemed 
requisite  as  a  preliminary  to  the  spoliation.  If  the 
King  was  now  the  supreme  spiritual  authority  in  his 
kingdom,  it  was  for  him  to  judge  whether  Becket 
was  really  a  Saint  or  not.  No  one,  indeed,  called  his 
saintship  in  question  but  the  King  himself  and  his 
courtiers ;   but  the  authority  that  moved  the  doubt 

^  L.  P.    XIII.  ii.  1280,  f.  34  b  :  xiv.  i.  1073. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   153 

must  judge  the  doubt,  and  the  result  was  a  foregone 
conclusion.  The  way  to  ascertain  whether  he  was  a 
true  Saint  or  not  was  to  cite  him  before  the  King's 
tribunal,  and  if  he  neither  appeared — as,  of  course, 
he  could  not — nor  anybody  else  in  his  behalf — which 
was  almost  as  unlikely — the  Saint  would  be  pronounced 
contumacious,  and  on  inquiry  into  his  acts  it  would 
be  found  that  he  was  no  Saint  at  all,  but  a  traitor  to 
his  King,  Henry  11.  It  was  therefore,  presumably, 
in  accordance  with  the  judgment  of  some  strangely 
constituted  Court,  that  the  bones  of  the  Saint,  when 
his  shrine  was  despoiled,  were  taken  out  and  burned.^ 

St.  Thomas  being  thus  unsainted,  his  hospital  in 
London  called  the  House  of  St.  Thomas  of  Acres 
"  was  suppressed,  and  the  master  and  brethren  put 
out,  and  all  the  goods  taken  to  the  King's  treasury  " 
on  the  21st  October,  the  day  that  was  wont  to  be 
hallowed  for  the  dedication  of  that  church.^ 

On  the  16th  November  a  lengthy  proclamation^ 
was  put  forth  by  the  King,  one  part  of  which  was 
devoted  to  Becket,  to  the  effect  which  we  have  just 
mentioned.      Becket   must  not  be  any  longer  con-  Becket  is 
sidered  a  Saint,  "  as  he  was  really  a  rebel  who  tied  to  ^.l^h^^ 
France  and  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  procure  the  images 
abrogation  of  wholesome  laws,  and  was  slain  upon  a  ,\'o^ 
rescue  made  with  resistance  to  those  who  counselled 
him  to  leave  his  stubbornness."     This  was  the  way 
loyal  subjects  were  henceforth   to  read  one  of  the 
most   significant  events  in  mediaeval  history ;    and 
popular  feeling  in  later  ages  has  scarcely  been  more 
sympathetic.      Becket's  "  pictures,"    that    is   to   say 
images,  throughout  the  realm  were  to  be  pulled  down 

^  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  86.  Cp.  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  Pref.  p.  xvi.  Some 
doubts  have  been  raised  of  late  years  as  to  the  actual  burning  of  the  bones  ; 
but  the  testimony  seems  to  be  quite  decisive.  See  Morris  on  "the  Eelics  of 
St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury."  As  to  the  process,  it  may  be  remarked  that 
most  of  the  letters  of  Chapuys  at  this  particular  period  seem  to  have  been 
lost  ;  else  we  might  have  had  some  notice  of  the  fact  written  at  the  time  in 
England. 

-  Wriothesley's  atronicle,  i.  88.  '  L.  P.,  xill.  ii.  848. 


154  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

everywhere,  his  festival  no  longer  kept,  and  the 
services  in  his  name  were  to  be  razed  out  of  all 
service  books.  This,  however,  was  only  the  final 
section  of  a  proclamation  the  main  character  of 
which  was  conservative ;  for,  however  revolutionary 
the  King's  own  proceedings  were,  it  was  most  im- 
portant to  the  vindication  both  of  his  old  and  of  his 
new  authority  that  he  should  discourage  anything 
like  revolutionary  proceedings  on  the  part  of  others. 
The  general  contents  of  the  proclamation  were  as 
follows  : — 

(1)  To  prohibit  the  import,  sale,  or  publication  of 
English  books  without  special  licence,  or  the  printing 
of  such  books  with  annotations  or  prologues  unless 
they  were  first  examined  by  the  Privy  Council  or  by 
some  authorised  person.  And  even  licensed  books 
must  not  bear  the  words  cum  privilegio  regali  with- 
out the  addition  acl  impriTnendum  solum. 

(2)  No  one  was  to  print  or  sell  any  "books  of 
Scripture "  without  the  supervision  either  of  the 
King  or  Council,  or  of  a  bishop.  Sacramentaries, 
Anabaptists,  or  others  who  should  sell  books  of  false 
doctrine  were  to  be  reported, 

(3)  No  one  was  to  reason  or  dispute  about  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar  except  those  learned  in 
divinity.  The  use  of  holy  bread,  holy  water,  kneel- 
ing and  creeping  to  the  cross  on  Good  Friday  and 
Easter  Day,  setting  up  of  lights  before  Corpus 
Christi,  bearing  of  candles  on  Candlemas  Day,  puri- 
fication of  women,  offering  of  chrisoms  and  other 
such  things,  were  to  be  observed  till  the  King  chose 
to  change  them. 

(4)  Priests  who  were  known  to  have  wives  or 
to  intend  marriage  were  to  be  deprived,  and  those 
marrying  henceforth  were  to  be  imprisoned  during 
the  King's  pleasure. 

(5)  Archbishops,  bishops,  and  even  deacons,  were 
to  preach  the  word  of  God,  showing  the  difference 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   155 

between  things  commanded  by  Him  and  the  cere- 
monies used  in  the  Church. 

(6)  The  article  about  Becket. 

It  will  be  seen  how  completely  the  King  asserted 
for  himself  in  this  proclamation  a  supreme  spiritual 
as  well  as  a  supreme  temporal  sovereignty.  All  the 
authority  which  had  been  hitherto  derived  from  the 
Pope  was  henceforth  to  be  derived  from  him.  The 
control  of  religious  literature,  judgment  of  heretical 
proceedings,  the  prohibition  of  discussion  on  high 
subjects,  the  permission  of  pious  ceremonies  of 
various  kinds  till  the  King  thought  fit  to  change 
them,  the  distinction — to  be  carefully  pointed  out — 
between  the  commands  of  God  and  Church  ceremonies 
that  the  King  might  alter,  and  finally  the  judgment 
on  Becket  that  he  was  no  Saint — which  implied  the 
King's  fitness  to  decide  that  question,  —  all  these 
things,  however  difi'erent  in  tendency,  were  full  of 
the  one  great  doctrine  of  the  King's  spiritual 
supremacy.  And  that  was  the  great  point  now  at 
issue,  as  no  man  saw  more  clearly  than  Henry  him- 
self For  as  to  his  subjects,  if  he  allowed  old  usages, 
they  did  not  look  upon  the  sanction  as  coming  from 
himself;  and  what  he  might  do  as  regards  the  sup- 
pression of  monasteries  and  other  unpopular  acts — 
well,  he  must  be  himself  answerable  for  them  before 
another  Tribunal.  It  was  not  for  subjects  to  judge 
him  even  in  these  things. 

The  only  question  was  whether  there  was  a 
tribunal  on  earth  that  could  bring  Henry  to 
account.  He  had  been  excommunicated  already,  in 
1535  ;  and  no  man,  surely,  could  have  deserved  ex- 
communication better  than  the  perpetrator  of  those 
horrid  butcheries  of  men  who  upheld  his  marriage 
with  Katharine  and  the  sanctity  of  the  Pope's  autho- 
rity !  But  what  good  had  been  done  by  his  excom- 
munication ?  He  had  never  relented  in  the  least ;  he 
had  made  the  rival  princes  on  the  Continent  afraid 


156  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


BK.   Ill 


to  receive  a  papal  legate  whom  he  disliked ;  and  now 

he   had   consummated   his   iniquities    by    insolently 

burning  the  bones  of  St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury,  the 

great  defender  of  the  rights  of  Holy  Church  against 

another  tyrant !     Rome  was  filled  with  horror.     But 

how  to  vindicate  the  Pope's  spiritual  jurisdiction  from 

this  further  outrage  more  effectually  than  by  the  bull 

Re-issue,     of  1535  was  uot  apparent.     So  that  bull  was  only 

with  an      rc-issued  with  an  addition  declaring  that  its  execution 

ofthebxiii  had  been  hitherto  suspended  from  a  hope  that  was 

of  excom-    ]jg}(j  q^^  i]^^i  -j^jjg  King  might  be  got  to  amend  ;  but 

niUTiic3.tion  o  o  o  ^ 

against  now  that  hc  had  proceeded  to  those  further  outrages 
Henry.  (and  hcrc  the  story  of  the  saint's  citation  and  trial 
were  brought  in,  with  some  additional  villanies,  such 
as  the  plunder  of  St.  Augustine's  monastery,  from 
which  he  turned  out  the  monks  and  put  in  deer  in 
their  places),  there  was  nothing  to  be  done  but  to 
cut  off  a  rotten  member  from  the  body  of  Christ. 
So  publication  of  the  bull  was  now  decreed,  which 
might  be  made,  as  thought  advisable — since  it  could 
not  be  done  in  England — at  Dieppe  or  Boulogne  in 
France,  at  St.  Andrews  or  Coldstream  in  Scotland, 
or  at  Tuam  or  Ardfert  in  Ireland.^  To  give  further 
effect  to  it  Pole  was  again  to  be  despatched  to  the 
Emperor,  and  a  messenger  was  sent  into  Scotland 
with  a  cardinal's  hat  for  David  Beton,  lately  made 
Bishop  of  Mirepoix  in  France.  If  only  the  Scots, 
the  French,  and  all  other  Christian  nations  would 
agree  to  prohibit  all  commerce  with  England,  the 
unhappy  country  might  still  be  recovered  for  the 
faith.  ■ 

But  all  depended  upon  foreign  aid  ;  and  what 
came  of  this  second  mission  of  Cardinal  Pole  we  shall 
see  hereafter.  Henry  meanwhile  was  very  well  aware 
that  Pole  was  a  danger  in  his  path ;  and  not  only 

'  The  bull,  which  is  dated  "  xvj.  kal.  Jan."  (Dec.  17)  1538,  is  printed  in 
Burnet's  Reformation  (Pocock's  ed.),  iv.  318,  and  in  Wilkins,  iii.  840. 
2  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  1108-1110,  1136. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   157 

Pole  himself  as  the  Pope's  representative,  but  his 
whole  family  as  prominent  members  of  the  Plouse 
of  York  who  stood  not  far  off  from  the  succession. 
There  was,  in  fact,  but  one  family  nearer,  that  of  the 
Marquis  of  Exeter,  a  grandson  of  Edward  IV.,  who 
had  an  only  son,  a  lad  of  twelve  years  old.  On  all 
these  the  King  was  keeping  w^atch,  knowing  well 
that  schemes  might  be  entertained  to  dethrone  him 
and  put  one  of  them  in  his  place.  Suddenly,  in  the 
end  of  August,  Cardinal  Pole's  brother  Sir  Geoffrey 
was  arrested,  and,  after  being  kept  some  time  in  the 
Tower,  was  very  closely  questioned  as  to  what  corre- 
spondence he  had  kept  up  with  his  brother  the 
Cardinal,  and  what  conversation  he  had  had  with 
others  in  England  who  had  expressed  a  desire  for 
some  change  in  the  state  of  affairs.  Pressed  by  such 
interrogatories,  under  fear  of  torture  he  was  obliged 
to  let  out  matters  which  touched  his  eldest  brother 
Lord  Montague,  and  also  the  Marquis  of  Exeter  and 
others.  The  two  noblemen  were  on  this  thrown  into 
the  Tower,  and  were  presently  tried  and  condemned 
for  high  treason,  while  Sir  Geoffrey  Pole,  having 
served  the  King's  purpose  in  this  matter,  received 
a  royal  pardon.  He  had  certainly  not  informed 
willingly  against  his  family,  and  what  he  had  shown 
ought  never  to  have  been  accounted  guilt ;  but  he 
knew  too  well  what  use  might  be  made  of  forced 
confessions,  and  not  long  after  his  arrest  he  had 
attempted  suicide — no  doubt  to  avoid  the  misery  of  Executions 
betraying  those  whom  he  loved.  Exeter  and  Lord  jJa^quis  of 
Montague  were  beheaded  at  Tyburn  on  the  9th  Exeter, 
December,  while  a  number  of  minor  persons  were  Montague, 
hanged  the  same  day  as  their  accomplices.  and  others. 

What  was  their  offence  ?  Simply  that  in  private 
conversation  they  had  expressed  dislike  of  the  King's 
proceedings  and  hoped  to  see  a  change ;  that  they 
thought  Cardinal  Pole  was  right  in  what  he  was 
doing ;    that    they    considered    that    knaves    ruled 


158  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

about  the  King,  and  feared  that  they  could  only  be 
displaced  by  civil  war ;  and  that  the  Marquis  of 
Exeter,  alluding  to  those  knaves,  had  once  said,  with 
clenched  fist,  "  I  trust  to  give  them  a  buffet  one  day." 
How  much  was  muttered  to  the  same  effect  in  many 
other  households  it  did  not  suit  the  King's  purpose 
to  inquire.  Lord  Montague,  however,  wished  rather 
to  be  out  of  the  way,  and  had  said  in  confidence  to 
his  brother  Geoffrey,  "  I  like  well  the  doings  of  my 
brother  the  Cardinal,  and  I  would  we  were  both  over 
the  sea,  for  this  world  will  one  day  come  to  stripes. 
It  must  needs  come  to  pass  one  day;  and  I  fear  we 
shall  lack  nothino;  so  much  as  honest  men."  Another 
thing  that  he  had  said  in  the  security  of  private 
conversation  is  well  worth  the  attention  of  any  one 
who  wishes  to  understand  the  times :  "  Cardinal 
Wolsey  had  been  an  honest  man  if  he  had  had  an 
honest  master."  ' 

That  was  the  real  state  of  matters.  There  was 
no  independence  anywhere.  The  nobility  had  been 
cowed  ever  since  the  execution  of  Buckingham ;  the 
Commons  were  as  yet  no  power  in  the  State,  though 
the  King  could  use  them  and  even  advance  their 
pretensions  to  suit  his  own  purposes.  There  was 
just  one  other  quarter  from  which  freedom  and  in- 
dependence might  be  looked  for,  and  had  been  looked 
for  in  past  times  not  in  vain.  That  was  the  Church ; 
but  even  the  Church  in  Enoiand  was  now  con- 
trolled  as  it  never  had  been  before.  Men  could  only 
look  abroad  for  help.  It  was  not  his  own  family 
merely,  we  may  be  sure,  that  "  liked  well  the  doings  " 
of  Cardinal  Pole ;  at  least,  it  certainly  would  not 
have  been,  if  others  had  known  as  much  about  them. 
While  in  England  bishops  and  clergy  were  sworn  to 
the  supremacy,  and  monasteries  were  dissolved  and 
saints  unsainted  by  a  new  authority  in  such  matters, 

^  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  979,  and  the  volume  (or  "part")  generally  for  the  story 
of  the  arrests,  trials,  and  executions. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   159 

and  bulls  from  Kome  forbidden,  and  any  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  old  spiritual  jurisdiction  declared  treason, 
the  hearts  of  men,  and  especially  of  good  men,  longed 
for  nothing  so  much  as  a  reassertion  of  that  spiritual 
jurisdiction  which  was  acknowledged  by  all  neigh- 
bouring countries,  and  which  alone  could  emancipate 
them  from  a  demoralising  and  insufferable  thraldom. 
If  England  had  been  so  emancipated  with  foreign  aid, 
even  at  the  cost  of  civil  w^ar,  she  would,  it  may  be 
safely  said,  have  been  far  more  grateful  for  foreign 
interference  than  she  was  even  when  the  father  of 
her  present  tyrant  with  French  assistance  put  down 
Richard  III.  Indeed,  there  are  not  wanting  evidences 
that  even  a  Scottish  invasion  in  behalf  of  the  faith 
would  have  been  far  from  inacceptable ;  and  the 
publication  of  the  papal  bull  against  Henry  at  St. 
Andrews  or  at  Coldstream  might  have  been  the 
signal  for  a  movement  of  far  greater  moment  than 
anything  that  had  been  done  in  England  for  a 
hundred  years.  Only  it  would  have  been  tanta- 
mount to  an  act  of  war. 

This  chapter  has  been  devoted  entirely  to  the 
doings  of  a  single  year,  from  the  end  of  1537  to 
the  end  of  1538  ;  and  yet  the  story  of  that  year  is 
incomplete.  All  that  has  been  related — the  beginning 
made  in  the  suppression  of  the  larger  monasteries, 
the  exposure  of  old  abuses,  the  crusade  against 
idolatry  and  superstition,  the  spoliation  of  shrines 
and  the  unsaintino-  of  Becket — were  but  successive 
steps  in  putting  into  practice  that  royal  supremacy 
which  had  previously  been  vindicated  in  theory  by 
relentless  executions.  So  great  a  revolution — which 
few  could  have  believed  at  first  would  either  have 
lasted  long  or  been  carried  so  far — took  some  time 
to  get  into  working  order,  and  these  were  parts  of 
the  process.  But  another  step  taken  this  year  has 
not  yet  been  mentioned — the  unfrocking  of  the  friars. 
It  has  been   shown    how,  in   1534,  all  the  different 


of  the 
Friars. 


i6o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Orders  of  friars  were  subjected  to  two  Royal  Visitors, 
George  Browne,  Prior  of  the  Augustinian  Hermits  of 
London,  and  John  Hilsey  of  the  Black  Friars.  Both 
Visitation  thesc  worthics  had  by  this  time  been  promoted  to 
bishoprics,  Browne  being  now  Archbishop  of  Dublin 
and  Hilsey  Bishop  of  Rochester.  Cromwell,  how- 
ever, as  the  King's  Vicegerent  in  spiritual  matters, 
had  obtained  for  Richard  Ingworth,  suffragan  Bishop 
of  Dover,  a  commission  to  visit  all  the  houses, 
not  only  of  his  own  Order,  the  Friars  Preachers 
(or  Black  Friars),  but  also  those  of  the  Minorites 
(Grey),  the  Carmelites  (White),  the  Augustinians, 
and  the  Crutched  Friars,  with  power  to  examine  and 
correct  abuses.^  This  was  issued  on  the  6th  February 
1538  ;  but  nothing  is  heard  of  Ingworth's  proceedings 
till  the  7th  April,  when  he  took  an  inventory  of  the 
goods  of  the  Grey  Friars  of  Ipswich,  a  house  which 
had  already  been  virtually  extinguished  by  the  action 
of  its  hereditary  founder.  Lord  Wentworth,  who,  as 
he  wrote  to  Cromwell  on  the  1st,  had  purchased  it 
for  himself  and  his  heirs,  seeing  that  the  friars  had 
been  compelled  for  very  poverty  to  sell  their  plate 
and  jewels,  as  the  people  would  no  longer  give  alms 
to  "  such  an  idle  nest  of  droans."  - 

It  seems  that  the  heads  of  other  houses  of  friars, 
anticipating  that  they  would  share  the  fate  of  the 
monasteries,  had  been  alienating  or,  in  some  cases, 
consuming  too  freely  the  property  that  belonged  to 
them,  and  the  Bishop  of  Dover  received  a  new  com- 
mission on  the  5th  May,  with  express  powers  to  put 
the  goods  of  the  houses  he  visited  into  safe  custody 
and  to  take  inventories  of  them.^  With  these  powers 
he  had  visited  some  of  the  principal  towns  of  the 
Midlands,  and  had  reached  Gloucester  by  the  23rd. 
He  had  found  everywhere  poverty,  "  and  much  shift 
made  with  such  as  they  had  before,  as  jewels  selling 

1  L,  p.,  XIII.  i.  225.  "'  L.  p.,  XIII.  i.  651,  699. 

3  L.  P.,  xm.  i.  926. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    i6i 

and  other  shift  by  leases."  But  he  had  stopped 
those  practices  by  making  indentures  and  sequestering 
their  common  seals ;  so  that  now,  before  the  year 
was  out,  the  communities  would  almost  all  be  driven 
to  give  up  their  houses  for  want  of  means  to  live. 
The  two  friars'  houses  where  he  was  at  Gloucester,  Surrenders 
were  ready  to  surrender  for  that  reason  at  once.  So^^f 
One  of  those  which  he  had  visited  (Atherstone,  an  taken. 
Augustinian  house)  was  too  poor  to  pay  the  costs 
of  their  Visitor — a  serious  matter  for  the  Bishop  of 
Dover  !  Another  Augustinian  house,  Droitwich,  was 
not  able  to  maintain  more  than  one  friar,  as  every- 
thing had  been  sold.  The  prior  had  felled  and  sold 
timber,  and  also  sold  a  gilt  chalice  of  70  ounces' 
weight,  a  censer  of  36  ounces,  2  great  brass  pots 
(each  able,  it  was  said,  to  seethe  an  ox  whole),  with 
spits,  pans,  and  so  forth.  Not  a  bed,  nor  sheet,  nor 
platter,  nor  dish  was  left  in  the  house,  and  the  prior 
could  not  furnish  a  true  account  of  what  he  had  done 
with  everything.  But  in  his  coffer  the  Bishop  found 
eleven  papal  bulls  and  above  a  hundred  "  letters  of 
pardons,"  while  in  all  the  choir -books  the  Pope's 
name  still  remained  unerased.  Such  a  prior,  of 
course,  was  handed  over  to  custody,  and  three 
neighbouring  gentlemen  were  each  anxious  to  get 
a  grant  of  the  house.  ^ 

After  this  beginning,  the  Bishop  went  on  to  visit 
in  the  west  and  south  of  England,  and  in  Wales, 
after  which  he  continued  his  work  in  the  eastern  and 
in  the  home  counties.  As  so  many  friars  were  going 
to  be  turned  adrift  he  desired  Cromwell,  as  the  King's 
Vicar-General,  to  send  down  dispensations  to  allow 
them  to  put  off  their  habits.  He  considered  that  in 
this  way  he  was  doing  them  good,  as  they  were  quite 
unable  to  live.  Yet  many  of  them  were  loth  to  for- 
sake their  houses,  especially  the  Grey  Friars.  He  had 
more  trouble  with  them,  he  said,  than  with  any  of  the 

^  Wright's  Suppression  of  the  Monasteries,  pp.  193-5. 
VOL.  II  M 


i62  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

others.^  Meanwhile,  Dr.  London,  Warden  of  New 
College,  had  received  a  commission,  along  with  the 
Mayor  of  Oxford  and  two  others,  to  "  look  upon " 
the  friars  in  that  town,  and  the  sphere  of  Dr. 
London's  labours  was  by  and  by  extended  to  other 
places  to  do  similar  work.^  His  method  was  a  trifle 
more  summary  than  that  which  the  Bishop  at  first 
employed ;  for  he  speedily  caused  all  the  four  Orders 
They  are  of  Friars  to  chaugc  their  coats. ^  The  change  by  and 
to^han-^e^  by  was  made  compulsory  everywhere,  even  where  it 
their  coats,  was  not  favourcd  by  the  heads  of  particular  houses, 
as  it  was  by  the  Warden  of  the  Grey  Friars  of 
London.*  Of  the  way  in  which  the  order  was  en- 
forced an  interesting  example  is  preserved  for  us 
in  the  pages  of  Foxe,  who  relates  it  with  great 
admiration  as  follows  : — 

Hereunto  also  pertaineth  the  example  of  Friar  Bartley, 
who  wearing  still  his  friar's  cowl  after  the  suppression  of 
religious  houses,  Cromwell,  coming  through  St.  Paul's  Church- 
yard and  espying  him  in  Rheines's  shop,  "  Yea,"  said  he, 
"  will  not  that  cowl  of  yours  be  left  off  yet  ?  And  if  I  hear, 
by  one  o'clock,  that  this  apparel  be  not  changed,  thou  shalt 
be  hanged  immediately,  for  example  to  all  others."  And  so, 
putting  his  cowl  away,  he  durst  never  wear  it  after. 

This  story  is  told  after  some  other  anecdotes  about 
Cromwell,  the  last  of  which  relates  how  in  a  no  less 
summary  way  he  stopped  a  man  in  the  street  and 
committed  him  to  prison  for  a  "  strange  newfangle- 
ness"  in  going  "with  his  hair  hanging  about  his 
ears  down  unto  his  shoulders,"  for  which,  on  being 
questioned,  he  pleaded  the  excuse  that  he  had  made 
a  vow.  And  after  relating  these  anecdotes  Foxe 
goes  on  to  lament  that  magistrates,  in  the  days  in 
which  he  wrote,  did  not  put  down  the  "  monstrous 
ruffs,"  the  "  prodigious  hose,"  and  the  "  prodigal,  or 
rather  hyperbolical,  barbarous  breeches  "  then  preva- 

1  L.  p.,  xill.  ii.  49.  2  X.  p.,  XIII.  i.  1335, 

'  X.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  235.  •»  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  251-2. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   163 

lent — the  last-named  garment  seeming  "  rather  like 
barrels  than  breeches."  "  But,"  he  concludes,  "  here 
we  may  well  see,  and  truly  this  may  say,  that 
England  once  had  a  Cromwell." 

We  may  say  now  that  England  more  than  once 
had  a  Cromwell  whose  ways  were  rather  drastic. 
But  we  are  only  concerned  here  with  the  first,  and 
with  his  eulogist.  If  these  little  anecdotes  had  been 
written  by  an  avowed  enemy  of  Thomas  Cromwell 
we  might  reasonably  have  suspected  that  the 
tyrannical  and  overbearing  character  of  this  upstart 
minister  of  Henry  VIII.  had  been  a  little  exaggerated. 
But  as  the  mode  of  action  he  reports  seems  to  Foxe 
worthy  of  all  commendation,  we  know  what  to  think 
both  of  him  and  of  Cromwell.  And  now,  who  was 
this  "  Friar  Bartley "  who  came  in  for  such  rough 
treatment  ?  He  was  a  man  of  some  celebrity,  better 
known  as  Alexander  Barclay,  for  surnames  were  Friar 
liable  to  considerable  variation  in  the  sixteenth  ^-'^'"^^''^y- 
century.  Alexander  Barclay,^  the  poet,  translator 
of  Sebastian  Brandt's  Slii'p  of  Fools,  was  believed 
by  some,  even  of  his  contemporaries,  to  be  a  Scots- 
man, though  the  fact  was  uncertain.  He  was, 
however,  connected  with  Devonshire,  and  composed 
his  poetical  version  of  the  work  just  named  "  in  the 
College  of  St.  Mary  Ottery  in  1508."  By  the  year 
1520  he  had  become  a  monk,  for  he  was  employed 
in  that  year  "  to  devise  histoires  and  convenient 
raisons  to  florisshe  the  buildings  and  banquet  house  " 
at  the  Field  of  the  Cloth  of  Gold,  and  is  called,  in 
a  letter  of  the  time,  "  Maistre  Barkleye,  the  Blacke 
Monke  and  poete."^  We  know,  in  fact,  that  he 
was  a  Benedictine  at  Ely ;  but  not  many  years 
afterwards  he  must  have  changed  his  Order  and 
become    a    Franciscan    friar.       Later,    however,    in 

^  Dr.  Barkley  he  is  called  by  Wriotliesley  (i.  82),  who,  though  he  does  not 
relate  the  same  anecdote,  mentions  him  particularly  as  one  "  which  was  very 
loth  to  leave  his  liypocrite's  coat." 

2  L.  P.,  HI.  737. 


i64  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  i?k.  m 

1528,  having  apparently  caught  a  little  of  the 
contagion  of  Lutheranism,  he  escaped  abroad  and 
took  refuge  in  Germany,  like  Roye  and  Tyndale/ 
Apparently  he  soon  returned  and  made  his  peace 
with  the  Church. 

Barclay  was  an  Observant  Franciscan,  and  when 
the  Observants  were  suppressed  in  1534  he  must 
have  been  handed  over,  like  Forest,  to  a  house  of 
the  Conventual  Franciscans.  Like  Forest,  too,  he 
must  have  obtained  a  relaxation  of  treatment  by 
compliance  with  the  Supremacy ;  but  he  evidently 
adhered  to  his  rule  as  far  as  might  be  permitted. 
He  was  suffered  to  go  about,  and  did  so  still  in 
his  friar's  weeds,  even  after  they  were  prohibited, 
till  he  met  with  Cromwell  as  above,  probably  in 
August  or  September  of  this  year  1538.  In  October 
he  was  in  the  West  Country  again — "  a  frere  in  some- 
what honester  weed,"  as  he  is  described  by  a  country 
gentleman  writing  to  Cromwell,  but  creating  a  good 
deal  of  disturbance  by  his  preaching,  which  did  not 
at  all  harmonise  with  what  was  now  expected  by  the 
authorities.  What  was  the  immediate  result  of  his 
doing  so  we  know  not ;  but  apparently  he  was 
obliged  to  take  the  world  as  he  found  it,  and  years 
afterwards  he  obtained  a  living  in  Essex.' 

We  will  now  leave  the  story  of  the  friars,  and  to 
complete  the  domestic  record  of  religion  in  1538, 
let  us  see  how  Henry  VIII.  in  November  exercised 
his  functions  of  supreme  judge  in  matters  of  theology. 
A  priest  named  John  Nicholson,  who,  having  been 
already    in    trouble   for   heresy    in    past   years,    had 

^  L.  P.,  IV.  4810.  The  words  of  the  original  letter  are  quoted  in  Demaus's 
Tijndale,  p.  162,  as  follows:  "Edmund  de  la  Pole,  who  called  himself  Duke- 
of  Suffolk,  was  demanded  of  King  Philip  [of  Castile]  to  be  brought  into 
England ;  and  William  Roye,  William  Tyndale,  Jerome  Barlow,  Alexander 
Barclay  and  their  adherents,  formerly  Franciscans  of  the  Observant  Order, 
now  Apostates,  and  also  George  Constans  [Constantiue],  and  many  others 
who  rail  against  your  Grace  [Wolsey]  ought  to  be  apprehended,"  etc. 

-  The  information  contained  in  Janiieson's  biography  of  Barclay,  preiixed 
to  Paterson's  edition  of  The  Ship  of  Fools  {187 'i),  was  amplified  in  part  by 
me  in  the  Preface  to  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  (pp.  8-9),  and  is  here  further  corrected. 


CH.  m  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    165 

adopted  the  name  of  Lambert  to  escape  the  atten- 
tions of  the  bishops,  was  indiscreet  enough,  after  a 
sermon  of  Dr.  John  Taylor,  a  favourer  of  the  New 
Learning,  to  seek  conference  w^ith  him  on  no  less 
weighty  a  subject  than  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar. 
Taylor,  unfortunately,  referred  him  to  Dr.  Barnes, 
who,  though  also  of  the  New  School,  was  an  adherent 
of  Luther  and  held  very  high  doctrine  on  that 
subject ;  and  Barnes  persuaded  Taylor  to  lay  the 
matter  before  Archbishop  Cranmer.  The  archbishop 
called  Nicholson  to  his  defence,  and  after  a  dispu- 
tation Nicholson  appealed  to  the  King.  At  least 
this  was  the  history  of  the  case  so  far  as  Foxe  could 
ascertain  it,  for  he  speaks  with  a  little  ambiguity 
about  the  last  part.! 

The  King  agreed  to  hear  him  in  person.  The  Trial  of 
1 6th  November  was  appointed  as  the  day ;  and  Nicholson, 
the  hearing  took  place  in  the  hall  of  Wolsey's  old  o^' 
palace  at  Whitehall,  still  often  called  York  Place." 
The  King  took  his  seat  upon  a  throne  with  a  great 
assembly  of  peers  and  judges  on  his  left,  while  on 
the  right  sat  the  bishops,  "  and  behind  them  the 
most  famous  lawyers,  clothed  all  in  purple,  according 
to  the  manner."  The  Kin 2^  himself  was  clothed  all 
in  white,  and  surveyed  the  prisoner,  who  was  brought 
in  by  a  guard  of  armed  men,  with  a  look  of  great 
severity.  He  called  upon  Dr.  Day  to  declare  the 
causes  of  the  assembly,  and  Day  pronounced  an 
oration,  the  drift  of  which  was  that  no  man  was  to 
imagine  that  the  King,  having  abolished  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  was  going  to 
extinguish  religion  or  give  liberty  to  heretics  to 
trouble  the  Church  with  impunity  ;  and  that 
they  were  not  assembled  to  dispute  upon  a 
heretical  doctrine  but  to  denounce  and  condemn 
it  openly.  The  King  then  rose  to  his  feet  and, 
leaning    on    a    cushion    of   white    cloth    of    tissue, 

1  Foxe,  V.  226-8.  ^  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  851. 


i66  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

said  to  Lambert,  "  Ho !  good  fellow,  what  is  thy 
name  ? " 

The  poor  man,  kneeling,  said,  "  My  name  is  John 
Nicholson,  although  of  many  I  be  called  Lambert." 

"What,"  said  the  King,  "have  you  two  names? 
I  would  not  trust  you,  having  two  names,  although 
you  were  my  brother." 

"  0  most  noble  prince,"  replied  Lambert,  "  your 
bishops  forced  me  of  necessity  to  change  my  name." 

Then,  being  told  to  proceed  to  the  matter,  he 
began  with  thankinor  God  who  had  inclined  the 
heart  of  the  King  to  hear  religious  causes  himself, 
as  bishops  were  often  guilty  of  great  cruelty  and 
privy  murder  without  the  King's  knowledge,  and  he 
trusted  that  God,  who  had  abundantly  endowed  a 
prince  with  so  great  gifts,  would  bring  about  some 
great  thing  through  him.  But  here  the  King  inter- 
rupted him,  saying,  in  Latin,  "  I  came  not  hither 
to  hear  mine  own  praises.  .  .  .  Answer  as  touching 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  whether  dost  thou  say 
that  it  is  the  body  of  Christ,  or  wilt  deny  it  ?  "  And 
with  that  the  King  raised  his  cap. 

"  I  answer,"  said  Lambert,  "  with  St.  Augustine, 
that  it  is  the  body  of  Christ  after  a  certain  manner." 

Again  the  King  said  in  Latin :  "  Answer  me 
neither  out  of  St.  Augustine,  nor  by  the  authority 
of  any  other,  but  tell  me  plainly  whether  thou  sayest 
it  is  the  body  of  Christ  or  no." 

"  Then  I  deny  it  to  be  the  body  of  Christ,"  said 
Lambert. 

The  King  said  he  would  then  be  condemned  by 
Christ's  own  words.  Then  Cranmer  was  called  on  to 
refute  ten  arguments  that  he  had  handed  in  to  Dr. 
Taylor.  While  he  was  discussing  the  matter,  how- 
ever. Bishop  Gardiner,  who  had  been  appointed  the 
sixth  place  in  the  disputation,  joined  in,  adducing 
texts  which  Cranmer  had  neglected  to  cite  ;  and  after 
him  Tunstall,   Bishop   of  Durham,   followed  on   the 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS   167 

same  side.  Next  came  Stokesley,  Bishop  of  London, 
who,  if  Foxe  may  be  trusted,  rejoiced  when  on  the 
point  of  death  that  he  had  in  his  time  burned  fifty 
heretics.  Ten  bishops  in  all  had  been  appointed  to 
dispute  the  question.  The  brief  winter  daylight  was 
gone  and  torches  lighted  before  the  discussion  ended, 
and  Lambert  was  reduced  to  silence,  or  saw  no  good 
in  answering.  The  King  then  said  to  him,  "  Art 
thou  not  yet  satisfied  ?     Wilt  thou  live  or  die  ? " 

Lambert  said  that  he  committed  himself  wholly 
to  the  King's  will. 

"  Commit  thyself  unto  the  hands  of  God,"  said 
the  King,  "  not  unto  mine."  He  added  that  he 
would  be  no  patron  of  heretics,  and  bade  Cromwell 
read  the  sentence.^ 

The  hearing  lasted  altoo-ether  from  noon  to  five 
o'clock.  Loyal  subjects  were  powerfully  impressed 
by  the  scene  and  the  way  the  King  had  deigned  to 
discuss  matters  with  a  troublesome  heretic.  "  The 
King's  Majesty,"  wrote  Husee  to  Lord  Lisle,  Tiie  King 
"  reasoned  with  him  in  person,  sundry  times  con-  eccksias- 
founding  him,  so  that  he  alone  would  have  been  ticai  judge. 
sufficient  to  confute  a  thousand  such.  It  was  not 
a  little  rejoicing  unto  all  his  commons  and  to  all 
others  that  saw  and  heard  how  his  Grace  handled 
the  matter ;  for  it  shall  be  a  precedent  while  the 
world  stands ;  and  no  one  will  be  so  bold  hereafter 
to  attempt  the  like  cause." "  No  less  laudation  of 
the  King  came  from  Sir  Thomas  Elyot,  in  the  dedica- 
tion of  his  Dictionary  to  Henry  VHL,  in  which  he 
speaks  with  admiration  of  "  a  divine  influence  or 
spark  of  divinity  which  late  appeared  to  all  them 
that  beheld  your  Grace  sitting  in  the  throne  of  your 
royal  estate  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of 
England  next  under  Christ,  about  the  decision  and 
condemnation   of  the  pernicious  errors  of  the  most 

1  Foxe,  V.  230-34  ;  Hall,  p.  827  ;  Wriothesley,  i.  88-89. 
-  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  851. 


i68  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

detestable  heretic,  John  Nicolson,  called  also  Lam- 
bert "  ;  when  all  men  admired  "  the  fulmination  of 
the  most  vehement  arguments "  by  the  King  in 
confutation  of  his  heresies,  and  also  his  "  wonderful 
patience  in  the  long  sustaining  of  the  foolish  and 
tedious  objections  of  the  said  Lambert,  as  also  your 
most  Christian  charity  in  moving  and  exhorting  so 
stubborn  a  heretic,  with  the  most  gentle  and  per- 
suasible  language,  to  recant."  The  people,  he  adds, 
wept  for  joy  at  seeing  it.^  Lambert  was  burned  in 
Smithfield  on  the  22nd,  six  days  after  his  sentence.^ 

There  is  but  one  thing  more  to  note  in  the  religious 
history  of  England  in  this  year  1538,  and  it  does  not 
concern  the  religious  history  of  the  people.  But  we 
may  tell  it  here  in  the  words  of  the  chronicler  : — 
A  German  "  This  year  in  June  came  over  into  England  to 
En^rnd  ^°  *^®  King's  Grace  certain  persons  out  of  Germany 
to  entreat  of  certain  Acts  concerning  the  true  setting 
forth  of  God's  Word  and  the  good  order  of  the 
spiritualty  ;  of  whom  the  head  person  was  a  tem- 
poral man,  well  learned,  being  Vice  -  Chancellor  to 
the  Duke  of  Saxony  with  others, — the  King  ad- 
mitting Dr.  Barnes  to  be  of  their  party,  and  for  the 
King's  Grace's  party  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
the  Bishop  of  Chichester  (Sampson),  Dr.  Wilson,  and 
three  other  doctors,  which  sat  every  week  two  or 
three  times  concerning  the  said  causes  of  long 
continuance."  ^ 

This  reception  of  a  German  Protestant  mission 
in  England,  which  had  come  for  the  purpose  of 
arranging  some  common  basis  in  religion,  is  un- 
doubtedly a  matter  of  great  historical  interest.  It 
was  a  failure,  indeed,  as  regards  its  express  object, 
and  produced  not  the  smallest  immediate  effect  on 
the  religion  of  England.     From  another  point  of  view, 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  852.  -  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  899  ;  Wriothesley,  i.  89. 

»  Wriothesley,  i.  81,  82. 


CH.  Ill  MONASTERIES  AND  SUPERSTITIONS    169 

however,  it  was  an  event  of  first-rate  importance. 
For  the  invitation  given  to  the  Germans,  and  the 
hopes  held  out  to  them  of  a  cordial  understanding 
— hopes  that  were  not  completely  blighted  when 
the  ambassadors  returned  to  their  country  after  a 
few  months'  uncomfortable  stay  in  England, — formed 
another  bulwark  against  the  power  of  Rome,  and 
against  any  attempt  to  depose  an  excommunicated 
king.  Nor  were  the  theological  results  of  the  con- 
ference by  any  means  forgotten  when,  in  a  later 
period,  the  Church  of  England  had  to  formulate  her 
doctrinal  position  as  a  Church  independent  of  the 
Papacy.  The  story  of  the  mission,  however,  must 
be  left  for  another  chapter. 


CHAPTER   IV 

GERMAN    PROTESTANTISM   AND    THE    ACT    OF    THE 
SIX   ARTICLES 

It  was  my  aim  in  the  last  chapter  to  give,  not 
exhaustively  but  by  particular  examples,  as  complete 
an  account  as  might  be  of  all  the  main  facts  that 
affected  religion  in  England  in  the  one  year  1538. 
But  to  estimate  all  the  agencies  at  work,  we  ought  to 
take  into  account  the  ballad  literature  of  the  period, 
and  more  especially  of  that  very  year ;  for  though  it 
will  scarcely  command  admiration  either  as  to  style, 
taste,  or  judgment,  it  was  nevertheless  a  factor  in 
doing  the  King's  work  that  should  not  be  overlooked. 
How  much  ribaldry  might  have  been  expected  to 
spring  up  spontaneously  when  once  it  was  known  that 
jests  at  sacred  things  were  not  looked  at  with  dis- 
favour, is  not  a  question  of  much  practical  consequence. 
But  the  fact  is  that  from  the  time  the  King  set  himself 
against  the  Pope  there  was  a  special  market  for  such 
things.  In  1533,  when  Francis  I.  was  endeavouring, 
as  Henry's  political  friend,  to  persuade  the  Pope  to 
delay  the  sentence  of  excommunication,  the  Pope  was 
compelled  to  pass  it  the  sooner  by  news  that  in  England 
his  authority  had  been  treated  with  the  grossest  dis- 
respect. The  King,  in  spite  of  a  promise  given  to 
Francis  to  take  no  further  steps  pending  the  result  of 
his  mediation,  had  caused  scandalous  farces  to  be 
played  in  London,  in  which  men  in  masks  went 
through  the  streets,  arrayed  as  cardinals,  with  the  most 

170 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE   SIX  ARTICLES  171 

shameless  characters,  male  aud  female,  seated  behind 
them  on  horseback.^  It  was  a  part  of  the  royal  policy 
to  use  such  methods  of  bringing  the  old  ecclesiastical 
authority  into  contempt,  and  in  this  he  received 
ample  aid  from  his  all-powerful  minister,  Cromwell. 

That  "  valiant  soldier  and  captain  of  Christ,"  as 
Foxe  describes  him, 

as  he  was  most  studious  of  himself  in  a  flagrant  zeal  to 
set  forward  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  seeking  all  means  and 
ways  to  beat  down  false  religion,  and  to  advance  the  true, 
so  he  always  retained  unto  him  and  had  about  him  such  as 
could  be  found  helpers  and  f urtherers  of  the  same ;  in  the 
number  of  whom  were  sundry  and  divers  fresh  and  quick 
wits,  pertaining  to  his  family;  by  whose  industry  and 
ingenious  labors,  divers  excellent  both  ballads  and  books 
were  contrived  and  set  abroad,  concerning  the  suppression  of 
the  Pope  and  all  popish  idolatry .2 

This  passage,  which  was  suppressed  by  Foxe  after 
his  first  edition,  was  followed  and  illustrated  by  the 
quotation  at  full  length  of  one  particular  sample  of 
these  "  excellent  ballads,"  entitled  "  The  Fantassie  of  The  old 
Idolatrie,"    the   martyrologist   passing  by   "a  great  Itt?cked 
sort "  of  the  like  matter,  which  he  says  he  might  have  i"  i^aiiads. 
brought  in  as  well.     This  ballad  was  the  work  of  one 
William   Gray,    a    servant    of    Cromwell,^    and   its 
character  deserves  consideration.     It  consists  of  fifty 
stanzas,  beginning : — 

All  chiristen  people 
Beyng  under  the  steple 

Of  Jesu  Christes  faith, 
Marke  aud  drawe  nere 
And  ye  shall  here 

What  the  holy  Scripture  sayth. 

Then   after  referring  to  the  Decalogue  and  other 
passages  in  reproof  of  idolatry,  the  writer  goes  on  : — 

^  Hamy's  Entrevue  de  Franr^ois  I.  avec  Henry  VIII.  (Documents,  p. 
ccclxxviii. ) 

^  Foxe,  V.  403  (from  1st  edition). 

^  Cp.  footnote  at  end  of  the  ballad  in  Foxe,  v.  409,  with  L.  P.,  xvi.  423, 
p.  213  note. 


172  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  n 

This  should  suffise 

All  those  that  be  wyse  ; 

But  we,  of  a  stoubourne  mynde, 
Be  so  harde  harted, 
Will  not  be  converted, 

But  rather  styll  be  blynde  ; 

Ronnyng  hyther  and  thyther, 
We  cannot  tell  Avhither 

In  offryng  candels  and  pence 
To  stones  and  stockes. 
And  to  olde  rotten  blockes, 

That  came  we  know  not  from  whense ; 

To  Walsyngham  a  gaddyng. 
To  Cantorbury  a  niaddyng, 

As  men  distraught  of  mynde  ; 
With  fewe  clothes  on  our  backes. 
But  an  image  of  waxe 

For  the  lame  and  for  the  blynde ; 

To  Hampton,  to  Ipswyche, 
To  Harforth,  to  Shordyche, 

With  many  mo  places  of  pryce, 
As  to  our  Lady  of  Worcester, 
And  the  swete  Rode  of  Chester, 

With  the  blessed  Lady  of  Penryce ; 

To  Leymster,  to  Kyngstone, 
To  Yorke,  to  Donyngton, 

To  Redyng,  to  the  chyld  of  grace ; 
To  Wynsore,  to  Waltam, 
To  Ely,  to  Caultam, 

Bare  foted  and  bare  legged  apace  ; 

To  Saynt  Earth  a  right, 
Where,  in  the  dark  nyght, 

Many  a  juglyng  cast  hath  be  done, 
To  Saynt  Angers  rotten  bones, 
That  ran  away  for  the  nones. 

To  the  crosse  that  groweth  at  Chaldon ; 

To  the  good  Holy  Ghoste, 
That  paynted  poste, 

Abyding  at  Basyng  stoke  ; 
Whiche  doth  as  muche  good 
As  a  god  made  of  wood, 

And,  yet,  he  beareth  a  great  stroke ; 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  173 

To  the  Holy  Bloud  of  Hayles, 
With  your  fyngers  and  nayles 

All  that  ye  may  stretche  and  wynne ; 
Yet  it  woulde  not  be  seen 
Except  you  were  thryven, 

And  clene  from  all  deadly  synue. 

There  were  we  flocked, 
Lowted  and  mocked  ; 

For  nowe  it  is  knowen  to  be 
But  the  blood  of  a  ducke, 
That  long  did  sucke 

The  thrifte  from  every  degre ; 

To  Pomfret,  to  Wyldon, 
To  Saynt  Anne  of  Bucston 

To  Saynt  Mighels  Mount  also  ; 
But,  to  reken  all. 
My  wyttes  be  too  small 

For,  God  knoweth,  there  be  many  mo. 

The  catalogue  does  not  end  here,  as  we  might 
expect  from  the  last  words ;  but  there  are  some 
indecencies  which  we  must  pass  over — indeed,  further 
on  they  are  atrocious.  The  following  additional 
allusions,  however,  will  interest  the  reader  of  the  last 
chapter : — 

For  the  Rode  of  Grace 
Hath  lost  his  place. 

And  is  rubbed  on  the  gall ; 
For  false  devotion 
Hath  lost  his  promotion. 

And  is  broken  in  peces  small. 

He  was  made  to  jogle, 
His  eyes  would  gogle. 

He  wold  bend  his  browes  and  frowue ; 
With  his  head  he  would  nod 
Like  a  proper  young  god 

His  chaftes  ^  wold  go  up  and  downe. 


^  Jaws. 


174  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Also  Delver  Gatliaerne 
As  (saieth  the  Welcheman) 

Brought  outhiwes  out  of  hell, 
Is  come  with  spere  and  shelde 
In  harneys  to  burne  in  Smythfielde ; 

For  in  Wales  he  may  not  dwell. 

Then  Forest  the  fryer, 
That  obstinate  Iyer 

That  wyllingly  is  dead, 
In  his  contumacy 
The  gospell  dyd  deny, 

And  the  Kyng  to  be  Supreme  Head.^ 

Towards  the  close,  as  we  might  expect,  there  is  a 
little  hit  at  Becket's  shrine  : — 

Besydes  these  stockes  and  stones, 

Have  we  not  had,  of  late,  traytors  bones, 

Thus  their  trompery  to  maintain  ? 
Whiche  is  a  token,  verely. 
They  go  about  most  earnestly 

To  bryng  in  superstition  again.  ^ 

Sad  doggrel  as  these  verses  are,  they  bring  to  view 
many  things  that  time  has  buried  in  oblivion,  or 
tradition  faintly  remembers ;  and  the  fact  that  the 
writer  does  not  spare  superstition  is  all  the  more 
helpful.  What  a  number  of  pilgrimages  to  places,  the 
very  names  of  which  are  not  always  known  to  us 
now  !  Curious  traditions  also  about  saints  occur  in 
passages  not  quoted.  Application  to  St.  Syth  for  a 
lost  purse,  to  St.  Loye  to  save  a  horse,  to  St.  ApoUi- 
naris  "  for  my  teeth  "  (the  saint,  it  seems,  could  cure 
toothache),  for  the  ague  to  Master  John  Shorne,  who 
conjured  the  Devil  into  a  boot,  and  so  forth.  At  the 
same  time  we  note  the  writer's  spirit  where  he  seeks 
to  palm  upon  us  the  fable  of  the  duck's  blood  at 
Hayles  as   a  fact  recently  ascertained,  when   it  was 

^  The  last  two  stanzas  are  quoted  by  Hall  in  his  Chronicle  (p.  826)  witli, 
perhaps,  slightly  better  readings. 
2  Foxe,  V.  404-409. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  175 

iudeed    positively   disproved.      We   must   be    quite 
prepared,  in  such  matters,  for  oflScial  mendacity. 

We  now  take  leave  of  the  domestic  records  of 
1538  to  pursue  a  subject  barely  touched  upon  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  last  chapter. 

Henry  had  for  years  been  watching  the  German  Henry 
Lutherans,  and  sometimes  corresponding  with  them,  J^^^-^e 
feeling,  even  before  his  actual  breach  with  the  Pope,  German 
that  they  might  one  day  be  useful  to  him  if  the  ^^^'^^^^^ 
Emperor  turned  against  him,  either  on  his  aunt's 
account  or  to  vindicate  the  authority  of  the  Holy  See. 
He  had  evidently  watched  with  peculiar  interest  the 
results  of  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  in  1530,  and  their 
opposition  to  the  election  of  Ferdinand  as  King  of  the 
Romans  in  1531.  They  had  written  to  him,  indeed, 
almost  immediately  after  the  latter  event  a  letter  in 
reply  to  which  he  commended  their  zeal  for  the 
reformation  of  the  Church,  but  discreetly  warned  them 
against  restless  men  too  eager  to  promote  a  change.^ 
In  1533,  however,  after  the  death  of  John  the  Constant, 
Duke  of  Saxony,  he  offered  to  place  a  resident  ambas- 
sador with  his  son  John  Frederic,  an  honour  which 
the  latter  wisely  declined  in  order  not  to  offend  the 
Emperor.^  Then  in  1534  he  sent  a  special  mission  to 
some  of  the  princes  to  encourage  them  to  a  league 
against  the  Pope.^  Early  in  1535  he  sent  over  to 
Wittenberg  Dr.  Robert  Barnes,  who  arrived  there  in 
March,  as  Melancthon's  letters  show,*  with  the  view 
of  getting  opinions  which  might  be  used  in  favour  of 
his  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn.  In  this  aim  Barnes, 
though  popular  with  the  Lutherans,  certainly  did  not 
succeed,  and  he  soon  returned. 

But  in  the  autumn  of  the  same  year  the  King,  sent 
over  a  more  important  embassy.  Being  then  in  full 
expectation  of  a  bull  of  excommunication  from  Rome, 
he  sought  to  neutralise  its  effects  by  sending  Edward 

1  L.  p.,  V.  App.  7.  -  L.  p.,  VI.  1079. 

2  L.  p.,  VII.  21.  ^  L.  P.,  VIII.  375,  384. 


176  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

Foxe,  whom  he  had  just  made  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
with  Dr.  Barnes  and  Dr.  Nicholas  Heath,  to  John 
Frederic,  Duke  of  Saxony,  and  the  Landgrave  of 
Hesse,  with  a  view  to  a  common  understanding  in 
matters  of  religion,  which  should  give  them  and  him 
mutual  support  alike  against  the  Pope  and  against 
the  Emperor.  Of  some  results  of  this  embassy  I  shall 
speak  more  fully  hereafter.  Here  I  only  sketch  the 
diplomacy.  An  agreement  was  soon  come  to  with 
the  princes  on  one  point — that  no  General  Council 
should  be  recognised  by  either  party  without  the 
consent  of  both.  But  the  King  declined  to  commit 
himself  and  his  realm  to  the  principles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  until  some  representative  theologians  were 
sent  by  the  Germans  to  England  to  confer  upon  the 
subject  with  his  own.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Lutheran  divines  could  not  be  won  over  to  pronounce 
marriage  with  a  deceased  brother's  wife,  though  a 
wrono;  thing  in  itself,  to  be  invalid  after  it  was  done ; 
and  it  may  be  that  their  refusal  to  concede  this  had 
something  to  do  with  Anne  Boleyn's  fall.^ 

But,  as  Bishop  Gardiner  clearly  pointed  out  when 
his  advice  was  asked  upon  the  subject,  it  would  have 
been  highly  injudicious  and  against  the  principles  on 
which  the  King  himself  was  proceeding  in  England  if 
he  had  made  a  league  with  princes  who  were  subjects 
of  the  Emperor  in  any  such  fashion.  The  King 
himself  was  an  Emperor  in  his  own  country  and 
Head  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Emperor 
ought  to  occupy  the  like  position  in  his  dominions. 
How  could  they  then  make  any  agreement  with 
Henry  without  their  Head's  consent  ? '  The  King 
undoubtedly  saw  the  force  of  these  considerations, 
and,  indeed,  was  guided  by  them ;  for  it  may 
be  safely  said  that  the  suggestion  of  a  union  with 
the    German    Protestants   on    matters  of  faith    was 

1  L.  P.,  IX.  1013-18,  1030  ;  x.  63,  108,  118,  265,  266,  289,  290,  305,  379, 
447,  448,  457,  584,  770-71.  •  L.  P.,  x.  256. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  177 

intended  for  nothing  but  a  lure  from  the  first.  "  My 
King  does  not  care  about  religion,"  said  Henry's 
own  zealous  advocate,  Dr.  Barnes,  to  Luther  once  ^ — 
a  singularly  frank  admission  from  an  envoy  sent  to 
solicit  Lutheran  aid  for  his  master.  And  we  need 
not  be  surprised  that  Henry  let  the  Lutherans  alone 
whenever  he  thought  he  could  do  without  them.      In 

1537,  however,  he  published  a  pamphlet  which  was  The  Kings 
most  popular  in  Germany,  holding  up  to  contempt  the  Snst the 
Pope's  efforts  to  procure  a  General  Council.     Nothing  council 
could  have  been  more  agreeable  to  the  German  Pro-  tTmJutua. 
testant  mind,  for  the  Pope  had  actually  issued  letters 

for  a  Council  to  meet  at  Mantua  in  the  May  of  that  year, 
and  had  left  Kome  in  April  in  order  to  open  it,  when 
he  was  compelled  to  put  it  off  by  the  Duke  of  Mantua's 
protest  that  he  would  require  an  armed  force  to  protect 
the  city  and  payment  for  its  support.^  The  German 
Protestants,  meanwhile,  had  protested  most  strongly 
that  though  they  had  always  desired  a  free  Christian 
Council,  such  a  place  as  Mantua  could  not  be  trusted, 
and  that  the  Pope,  who  had  pronounced  judgment  on 
them  already,  had  no  authority  in  himself  to  call  a 
General  Council.^  The  King  of  England's  pamphlet 
accordingly  was  quite  to  their  mind.  It  was  im- 
mediately reprinted  at  Wittenberg,  and  at  least  three 
German  translations  of  it  were  published  in  1537  and 

1538,  one  of  them  in  two  editions  issued  severally 
at  Augsburg  and  at  Strasburg.*  John  Frederic  of 
Saxony  and  Philip  Landgrave  of  Hesse  both  wrote 
to  express  to  him  their  satisfaction  that  it  agreed  so 
well  with  the  answer  they  themselves  had  given  to 
the  nuncio  and  the  Imperial  ambassador  at  their  Diet 
at  Schmalkalden.  In  doing  so  they  also  took  occa- 
sion to  apologise  for  their  own  remissness  (at  which 
they  heard  Henry  was  somewhat  dissatisfied)  in  not 
having  reported  this  answer  to  him  earlier ;   and  they 

1  L.  P.,  XVI.  106.  "^  L.  P.,  xiir.  i.  432,  887,  989. 

3  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  564.  *  L.  P.,  XII.  i.  1310. 

VOL.  II  N 


178  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

assured  him  that  they  and  their  allies  in  religion  were 
fully  alive  to  his  efforts,  set  forth  by  that  great 
embassy  of  learned  men  two  years  before,  to  restore 
the  true  worship  of  God  and  get  rid  of  the  impiety 
and  tyranny  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.^ 

It  may  be  doubted,  perhaps,  whether  they  were 
really  very  grateful  for  that  great  embassy,  which 
remained  much  longer  in  Germany  in  the  spring  of 
1536  than  there  seemed  any  necessity  for,  and  no 
doubt  put  the  princes  to  sonde  cost  in  entertaining  it.^ 
But  Henry  was  astute  enough  to  despatch,  early  in 
1538,  to  their  Diet  at  Brunswick,  an  agent  of  his  own 
named  Christopher  Mont,^  himself  a  German,  to 
encourage  them  to  send  an  embassy  to  England  to 
take  joint  measures  against  the  proposed  Council  and 
for  the  establishment  of  sound  religion.*  An  embassy 
the  princes  themselves  had  talked  of  sending ;  but 
there  were  difificulties  in  the  way — amongst  others, 
that  Christian  HI,  the  new  King  of  Denmark,  not 
acknowledged  as  such  by  the  Emperor,  nor  even  by 
Henry  (who  had  been  treating  with  the  city  of 
Lubeck  in  a  way  by  no  means  favourable  to  him), 
had  joined  their  Gospel  league  and  abolished  papal 
jurisdiction  in  his  kingdoms.  The  Diet,  however, 
agreed  to  send  two  of  their  divines  to  England,  and 
ultimately  added  a  third.  Mont  in  vain  asked  that 
German  Melaucthou  should  be  among  them ;  but  the  three 
sent^^o  ®®^^  were  Francis  Burchart  (Vice-Chancellor  of  the 
England;  Dukc  of  Saxouy),  Dr.  George  Boyneburg,  and  Frederic 
Myconius.  They  arrived  in  London  on  the  last  day 
of  May.' 

They  were  detained  in  England  somewhat  longer 
than  they  found  pleasant.  During  June  and  July 
they  had  conferences   with   Henry's   divines,   and  a 

1  L.  P.,  XII.  i.  1088-89.  ^  x.  p.^  x.  584,  677. 

^  His  Latin  surname  seems  to  have  been   Montaborinus,   or   sometimes 
Montanus,  generally  abbreviated  into  Mont. 
*  i.  P.,  XIII.  i.  352-3,  367,  648-50,  815. 
5  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  648-50,  815,  985,  1102,  1266. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  179 

number  of  theological  papers  remain  among  our 
archives,  which  were  partly,  it  would  seem,  produced 
by  them  and  partly  by  the  English.^  On  the  5th 
August  they  wrote  to  the  King  that  they  felt  it 
necessary  to  return  to  Germany,  and  though  they 
had  not  arrived  at  an  agreement  with  regard  to  some 
abuses  in  the  Church,  which  they  felt  ought  to  be 
rooted  out,  they  had  made  good  progress  and  must 
content  themselves  with  putting  the  matter  before 
the  King,  who  would  doubtless  have  it  fully  discussed 
by  his  own  divines.  The  points  which  they  still 
regarded  as  heads  of  papal  idolatry  were  the  prohibi- 
tion of  communion  in  both  kinds,  the  use  of  private 
masses,  and  the  enforced  celibacy  of  the  clergy."  On 
these  subjects  the  bishops  had  left  it  to  the  King  him- 
self to  reply,  knowing  that  he  intended  to  do  so,  as 
they  were  afraid  to  write  contrary  to  the  King's 
mind ;  while  on  other  matters,  such  as  matrimony, 
orders,  confirmation,  and  extreme  unction,  on  which 
they  felt  sure  that  the  Germans  would  not  agree  with 
them,  except  perhaps  on  the  one  head  of  matrimony, 
they  desired  Cranmer  to  draw  up  a  treatise.  Henry 
answered  the  German  envoys,  declaring  his  own  view 
in  opposition  to  theirs  on  what  they  considered  to  be 
the  three  great  abuses ;  but  he  promised  to  take 
further  counsel,  and  hoped  to  see  them  again  before 
they  left.' 

The  poor   Germans,   though   well   entertained   in 
public,  were    disgracefully   ill   lodged,    rats   running 
about  their  chambers ;   and  one  of  them,  Myconius, 
fell  seriously  ill  in  September.      But  it  was  only  on 
the  1st  October  that  the  King  gave  them  a  letter  to 
take  to  John  Frederic  of  Saxony,  praising  their  erudi-  and  cUs- 
tion  and  Christian  piety,  and  expressing  a  hope  of  ^^H^^ 
good  results  from  what  had  already  been  agreed  to.  pieasaut 
He  still  hoped  that  Melancthon  and  other  learned  men  ^''°'^'^^' 

^  L.  p.,  XIII.  i.  1306-1308  ;  ii.  166.     Also  x.  585. 
2  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  37,  38.  »  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  126,  164-65. 


i8o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

would  be  sent  to  conclude  the  matter.^  Melancthon 
himself  wrote  to  the  King  in  March  and  April  follow- 
ing, but  said  nothing  about  coming  to  England.  He 
only  expressed  his  satisfaction  at  Burchart's  report  of 
the  conferences  there,  and  hoped  that  they  would  lead 
up  to  a  general  consent  in  doctrine  among  those 
churches  which  disowned  the  tyranny  of  Rome.  Bur- 
chart  had  been  loud  in  the  King's  praises,  and  Melanc- 
thon, warmly  commending  his  zeal  for  the  Christian 
religion,  trusted  earnestly  that,  as  Henry  had  already 
begun  to  put  down  some  superstitions,  he  would  be 
led  to  correct  such  abuses  as  still  remained.^ 

At  the  same  time  he  naturally  expressed  himself 
with  a  good  deal  more  freedom  in  a  private  letter  to 
Cranmer.  Why  should  England  retain  the  impious 
laws  of  Rome  after  getting  rid  of  their  author  ? 
Why,  especially,  should  the  marriage  of  priests  still  be 
prohibited  ?  Why  should  rites  which  were  manifestly 
opposed  to  Scripture  be  enjoined,  and  old  customs 
about  differences  of  foods,  creeping  to  the  cross,  and 
the  like,  be  vindicated  by  new  sophistries  and  mystic 
significations  such  as  Bishops  Stokesley  and  Gardiner 
loved  to  produce  ?  Let  there  be  no  more  follies  main- 
tained which  tended  to  nourish  superstition.^ 

But  Melancthon  and  his  friends  were  altogether 
mistaken  if  they  expected  Henry  to  move  in  this 
direction.  He  intended  still  to  make  use  of  them, 
but  quite  in  a  different  way.  That  Burchart  went 
back  to  his  country  captivated  by  the  King's  affability 
we  can  very  well  believe,  for  there  was  a  special 
reason  why  he  should  have  been  so.  When  he  was 
in  England  Cromwell  had  ventured,  as  if  totally 
unauthorised — a  sort  of  fiction  well  understood  in 
diplomacy — to  suggest  to  him  a  marriage  between  the 
King's  daughter  Mary — "  the  Lady  Mary,"  as  she 
was  called  at  Court,  since  she  was  no  longer  recognised 

1  L.  p.,  XIII.  ii.  298,  497.  "^  L.  P.,  xiv.  i.  613,  666. 

3  Z.  P.,  XIV.  i.  631. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  i8i 

as  Princess — and  the  young  Duke  of  Cleves.^     John,  Match- 
Duke  of  Cleves,  and  his  son  "William  each  bore  the  "^^'^^^f 

.  .  snggesteu. 

title  of  duke,  even  when  the  father  was  still  alive ; 
and  young  William  had  prospects  before  him  that 
Henry  was  not  slow  to  appreciate.  Nevertheless  the 
suggestion  of  this  marriage — a  dazzling  enough  match 
for  a  young  German  prince,  even  though  the  King 
insisted  on  regarding  his  daughter  as  illegitimate — 
was  apparently  only  intended  to  raise  expectations, 
and  to  pave  the  way  for  something  more  momentous. 
But  of  this  more  shall  be  said  by  and  by. 

Henry  had  at  this  time  real  need  of  friends  upon 
the  Continent ;  for  his  constant  policy,  ever  since 
defying  the  Pope,  to  strengthen  the  enmity  between 
Francis  I.  and  the  Emperor  for  his  own  security,  had 
fairly  broken  down  for  the  time.  The  Pope's  efforts 
to  bring  the  two  princes  to  an  agreement  had  been 
successful.  A  ten  years'  truce  had  been  negotiated 
between  them  at  Nice  in  June  1538,  and  a  subsequent 
interview  at  Aigues  Mortes  confirmed  the  good  im- 
pression that  old  enmities  were  now  laid  aside.  The 
Pope  was  thus  encouraged  to  despatch  Cardinal  Pole  Pole's 
on  a  second  mission  to  the  Emperor  and  Francis  I.  ^i^g°gJoii. 
with  a  view  to  action  against  England,  either  to 
dethrone  King  Henry  or  to  bring  him  once  more  into 
submission  to  the  Church. 

To  make  peace  with  the  Church,  after  all  he  had 
done,  would  have  been  a  serious  humiliation  to  the 
King ;  but  the  situation  was  alarming.  For  he  knew 
that  he  was  thoroughly  disliked,  both  by  Francis  and 
the  Emperor,  besides  having  undoubtedly  lost  the 
hearts  of  his  own  subjects  generally.  So,  if  Francis 
and  the  Emperor  could  act  cordially  together  now, 
this  second  mission  of  Pole  was  pretty  sure  of  success. 
Of  all  Englishmen,  Pole  had  best  reason  to  resent 
Henry's  tyranny ;  for  the  news  of  his  brother  Lord 
Montague's  execution  had  reached  Rome  just  before 

1  L.  p.,  XIII.  i.  1198  ;  xiv.  i.  103  (1,  2). 


1 82  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

lie  started,  and  even  his  mother  had  been  rudely 
questioned  and  placed  in  confinement,  though  not  as 
yet  committed  to  the  Tower.  Yet,  bitterly  as  he  felt 
the  wrongs  done  to  his  family,  it  was  with  no  thought 
of  avenging  private  injuries  that  he  set  out  from 
Rome  immediately  after  Christmas  1538,  travelling 
in  disguise  with  few  attendants  to  avoid  assassins, 
whose  services,  it  had  not  been  obscurely  hinted,  the 
King  of  England  was  quite  ready  to  employ  against 
him.  After  a  long  and  painful  winter  journey  he 
reached  the  Emperor's  Court  at  Toledo  in  the  middle 
of  February  1539,  and  there  was  no  fear  this  time 
that  he  should  be  refused  access  because  England 
chose  to  regard  him  as  a  traitor. 

His  extradition,  indeed,  was  demanded  by  the 
English  ambassador.  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt ;  but  the 
Emperor  returned  a  flat  refusal,  declaring  that  even 
if  he  had  been  a  traitor  to  himself,  he  could  not  but 
give  audience  to  one  coming  as  legate  from  the  Holy 
Father  at  Rome.  Pole,  indeed,  might  well  have 
expected,  even  on  his  own  account,  not  only  protec- 
tion but  a  kindly  welcome  ;  for  it  was  but  nine  months 
since  the  Emperor  at  Villafranca  had  expressly  sought 
his  acquaintance  to  thank  him  for  the  way  he  had 
maintained  the  cause  of  his  aunt,  Katharine  of 
Aragon.  But  kindly  feelings  now  gave  place  to 
diplomatic  considerations;  and  though  the  Emperor 
treated  him  with  the  respect  due  to  a  legate,  he  did 
not  greatly  warm  to  the  proposal  of  taking  action 
against  Henry,  even  by  way  of  forbidding  commercial 
intercourse  with  England.  He  required  first  to  be 
assured  that  Francis  would  co-operate  with  him  in 
such  a  policy ;  and  Francis,  as  it  soon  appeared, 
required  first  to  be  assured  that  the  Emperor  would 
do  so  with  him.  For  Pole,  having  withdrawn  from 
Toledo,  sent  his  friend  Abbot  Parpaglia  to  the  King  of 
France  to  learn  if  his  coming  on  such  a  mission  would 
be  acceptable ;   and  Francis,  though  very  polite,  con- 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  183 

fessed  that  it  would  be  undesirable.     Thus  the  second  which  is 
mission  of  Pole  turned  out  as  unfruitful  as  the  first,      successful 

Charles  V.  knew  too  well  the  difficulties  of  his  own 
position  to  be  willing  to  act  alone  against  England,  even 
in  the  way  of  cutting  ofi"  commercial  intercourse,  unless 
sufficiently  assured  that  he  should  not  act  alone.  The 
Turk  outside  the  Empire,  and  the  Protestant  princes 
within,  always  gave  him  a  good  deal  of  trouble,  and 
of  late  he  was  full  of  further  anxieties  on  the  side  of 
Cleves.  Charles,  Duke  of  Gueldres,  who  had  been  a 
constant  source  of  irritation  to  the  House  of  Bur- 
gundy and  to  the  Empire,  died  in  June  1538,  and, 
as  he  had  no  heirs,  his  Duchy,  by  an  agreement  made 
with  the  Estates,  fell  to  William,  the  young  Duke  of 
Cleves.  The  young  Duke  accepted  it,  and  prepared 
to  make  good  his  possession  against  the  Emperor, 
who  claimed  it  by  another  title.  The  elder  Duke  of 
Cleves  then  died  in  February  1539,  and  the  Duchy 
of  Gueldres  was  in  the  fair  way  of  being  united 
with  its  three  neighbours  on  the  Rhine,  the  Duchies  The 
of  Cleves,  Juliers,  and  Berg,  under  one  lord.  This  in  difficuuLI 
itself  was  serious  enough ;  but  it  was  all  the  more  so 
as  the  young  Duke's  eldest  sister,  Sibylla,  was  married 
to  John  Frederic,  Duke  of  Saxony,  and  though  the 
young  Duke  of  Cleves  himself  had  not  as  yet  thrown 
in  his  lot  with  the  Protestants,  there  was  little  doubt 
that  he  could  get  important  aid  from  them  in  a 
struggle  with  the  Emperor.  The  Protestants,  more- 
over, as  we  have  seen,  were  in  league  with  Christian 
III.  of  Denmark,  whom  the  Emperor  regarded  as  a 
usurper,  for  he  had  succeeded  his  father,  Frederic  I., 
in  derogation  of  the  rights  of  Christian  II.,  the 
Emperor's  brother-in-law,  long  ago  deposed  by  the 
Estates  of  Denmark  for  tyranny,  but  still  alive  and 
maintained  by  Charles  as  the  true  and  rightful  king. 

So  here  was  an  array  of  dukes  and  princes  whose 
countries  included  the  whole  course  of  the  Lower 
Rhine  from  the  Zuyder  Zee  to  Cologne,  and  from  thence 


1 84  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

stretched  across  Northern  Germany  to  the  confines  of 
Brandenburg,  likely  to  be  aided  in  a  revolt,  religious 
or  political,  against  the  Emperor  by  the  actual  ruler 
of  Denmark.  They  hardly  required  sympathy  from 
England  to  make  themselves  dangerous  ;  but  the  King 
of  England  required  sympathy  to  ward  off  dangers  to 
himself  And  it  was  rather  a  mistake  on  Henry's  part, 
as  it  was  his  aim  to  encourage  the  Protestant  princes 
against  the  Emperor,  that  at  first  he,  like  Charles  V. 
himself,  had  declined  to  recognise  the  title  of  the  new 
King  of  Denmark,  but  had  played  a  game  of  intrigue 
in  the  north  of  Europe  which  turned  out  unsuccessful, 
and  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  speak  of  here.  He 
did  his  best,  however,  at  this  time  to  make  amends 
for  his  mistake  to  Christian  HI.,  for  the  success  of 
Pole's  second  legatine  mission  would  have  left  him 
without  a  friend  upon  the  Continent.  And  in  very 
Henry  truth,  in  the  beginning  of  1539,  he  seemed  like  a 
desperate  man.  The  French  ambassador,  Castillon, 
who  was  anxious  to  be  recalled,  seemed  almost  afraid 
of  personal  violence  at  his  hands,  even  though  Henry's 
own  ambassador  in  France  might  serve  as  hostage  for 
him,  for  he  wrote  that  he  was  the  most  dangerous  and 
cruel  man  in  the  world,  and  seemed  to  be  in  such  a 
fury  that  he  had  neither  reason  nor  understanding  left.^ 
It  was  in  this  desperate  condition  that  he  sent 
Mont  over  once  more  to  see  what  the  German 
Lutherans  were  about,  and  to  ascertain  how  the  two 
Dukes  of  Cleves  (for  the  father  was  then  still  alive) 
stood  afiected  towards  the  "  Bishop  of  Rome  "  ;  also, 
whether,  if  they  were  still  "  of  the  old  popish 
fashion,"  there  was  any  chance  of  getting  them  to 
change  their  opinions.  And  it  was  at  this  time  that 
Cromwell,  of  course  in  concert  with  the  King,  gave 
Mont  his  own  private  instructions  suggesting  the 
match  of  the  young  Duke  of  Cleves  with  "  the  Lady 
Mary."  ^      Not   a  word,   as  yet,   had  been  breathed 

1  i.  p.,  XIV.  i.  144  (p.  53).  ^  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  103  (1,  2). 


VIII 

desperate, 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE   SIX   ARTICLES  185 

about  another  and  a  still  more  important  match  ;  but 
Mont  also  received  instructions  from  Cromwell  to  An  alliance 
inquire  diligently  touching  the  beauty  and  other  Juggg^JeJ!' 
qualities  of  the  elder  of  the  two  daughters  of  the 
old  Duke,  and  if  he  found  that  she  was  a  person  who 
could  be  "  likened  unto  his  Majesty,"  he  might  tell 
Burchart  that  Cromwell,  for  the  sake  of  the  alliance 
with  Germany,  would  be  glad  to  persuade  the  King, 
not  only  to  marry  the  young  Duke  of  Cleves  to  the 
Lady  Mary,  but  to  marry  his  elder  sister  himself. 
The  King,  indeed,  had  been  angling  for  a  wife  else- 
where, merely  to  get  one  sure  friend  upon  the 
Continent.  At  one  and  the  same  time  he  had  been 
seeking  the  hand  of  the  Emperor's  niece,  Christina, 
Duchess  of  Milan,  and  that  of  Mary  of  Guise,  or 
any  of  her  sisters  that  might  be  found  convenient,  in 
France.  But  as  no  favourable  answer  had  come  from 
Flanders  or  from  France  to  any  of  these  alternative 
wooings,  Cromwell  believed  the  King  was  perfectly 
free  for  a  match  with  Anne  of  Cleves.  Mont,  how- 
ever, was  not  to  speak  as  if  asking  her  in  marriage, 
but  rather  to  instigate  the  Germans  to  make  the 
offer,  and,  if  they  thought  well  of  it,  to  suggest  the 
expediency  of  sending  her  portrait  to  England. 

It  was  in  January  1539  that  Mont  was  despatched 
to  Germany  with  these  instructions.  In  the  middle 
of  February  he  and  a  colleague  named  Thomas  Pay- 
nell  wrote  to  Cromwell  that  they  had  not  been  able 
as  yet  to  obtain  any  answer  to  the  principal  points  of 
their  charge,  except  that  the  Duke  of  Saxony  was 
very  well  pleased  with  the  proposed  "  affinities,"  and 
would  do  his  best  to  bring  them  to  effect.  Cromwell 
replied  to  their  letters  on  the  10th  March,  when  he 
had  a  piece  of  important  news  to  communicate, 
affecting  the  common  interests  of  the  King  and 
the  German  Protestants.  The  news,  in  fact,  must 
have  been  received  in  England  by  the  5th,  on 
which  day  Dr.  Barnes  was  despatched  with  a  very 


1 86  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

special  message  to  Christian  III.,  the  city  of  Wismar, 
and  John  Frederic  of  Saxony/  He  was  charged  to 
tell  them,  as  Mont  and  Paynell  also  were  to  tell 
those  to  whom  they  were  sent,  that  when  Wyatt  in 
Spain  demanded  of  the  Emperor  that  Cardinal  Pole, 
as  an  English  rebel,  should  be  refused  entry  into  his 
dominions,  the  Emperor  not  only  said  that  he  could 
not  refuse  audience  to  one  thus  sent  from  the  Holy 
Father,  even  if  he  were  "  his  own  traitor,"  but,  when 
Wyatt  pressed  him  with  the  treaties,  replied  indig- 
nantly that  he  was  quite  as  free  to  give  audience  to  an 
English  rebel  as  Henry  was  to  receive  emissaries  from 
the  Duke  of  Saxony  and  the  Landgrave,  who  were 
the  Emperor's  rebels,  being  his  vassals,  and  enemies 
at  the  same  time  to  "  the  Catholic  Church  of  Chris- 
tendom." Moreover,  he  knew  that  Henry  had 
received  "  letters  and  orators  from  the  Duke  of 
Holtz"  (that  is.  Christian  HI.),  "  usurpator  of  the 
kingdom  of  Denmark,  by  whose  means  his  brother- 
in-law.  King  Christian,  is  kept  tyrannically  in 
prison."  ^ 

Nothing  could  have   served  better  than   this  to 

make  amends   for  past  coolness  on  Henry's  part  in 

not  at  once  recognising  the  title  of  Christian  HI. 

He  had,  indeed,  done  his  best  to  atone  for  his  error  a 

year   before ;    but  now  he    had    an    opportunity    of 

pointing  out  that  they  were  both  united  in  a  common 

cause  against  the  Emperor,  because  he  was  a  danger 

to  them  both,  and  that  it  would  be  desirable  to  form 

a  league  against  the  Papists  "  for  the  preservation  of 

Henry      the  Christian  religion."    Christian  responded  in  a  like 

christiln''  spii^i^j  aii<l  hoped  nothing  would  deter  Henry  from 

III.  of      maintaining  the  true  Church  of  God  against  the  false 

Denmark.  Qhurch  of  the  Bishop  of  Pome.^     So  the  King  had 

secured  one  valuable  friend  at  least  on  the  Continent. 

He  also  sent  two  skilful  diplomatists,  Sir  Edward 

1  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  441-3.  2  jr_  p^  XIV.  i.  490  (p.  192),  955. 

^  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  956. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  187 

Carne  and  Dr.  Nicholas  Wotton,  with  a  gentleman 
of  his  Privy  Chamber,  to  the  young  Duke  of  Cleves 
(whose  father  was  now  dead)  to  say  that  he  per- 
ceived the  ill-will  entertained  towards  him  and  the 
Evangelic  princes  by  the  Emperor  at  the  Pope's 
instigation,  and  saw  that  he  meant  to  use  force  to 
deprive  him  of  the  Duchy  of  Gueldres.  They  were 
to  advise  the  Duke  carefully  to  consider  matters,  and 
to  assure  him  that  the  King  was  willing,  for  old 
friendship's  sake,  to  make  a  league  with  him,  offering 
him  a  suitable  lady  in  marriage ;  or  perhaps,  if  the 
King  himself  were  free  from  any  engagement  in 
that  matter,  and  if  a  lady  suitable  for  him  were 
found  in  the  Duke's  dominions,  Henry  might  be  led 
into  considering  an  overture  from  him  conveyed 
through  ambassadors,  with  a  portrait  of  the  lady.  If 
the  Duke  seemed  well  inclined,  they  might  ask  for  a 
sight  of  his  elder  sister,  and  assure  him  that  if  he 
could  offer  reasonable  conditions,  and  Henry  was 
pleased  with  her,  the  King  would  be  "  glad  to  honor 
his  house  and  family  with  matrimony  with  her,"  and 
make  her  a  liberal  dower.  Moreover,  if  a  reasonable 
reciprocity  could  be  established,  the  King  would  not 
hesitate  to  make  a  defensive  and  offensive  league 
with  him.  But  meanwhile,  as  there  were  ugly, 
though  not  very  probable,  reports  in  Flanders  of  an 
invasion  of  England,  which  the  Emperor  might 
undertake  at  the  instigation  of  "  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,"  the  King,  though  reasonably  well  provided 
against  any  sudden  attack,  would  be  grateful  if  the 
Duke  could  spare  him  100  expert  gunners  to  be  kept 
for  a  time  at  the  King's  cost.^ 

In    such   wise   was    the    foundation    laid    for   the  The  match 
match    with    Anne    of   Cleves.       Matrimonial    pro-  ^1%^^^^ 
jects   and   requests    for  artillerymen  went   together, 
for  they  had  a  common  object ;  and  the  King  was 
seeking  both  guns   and   gunners    in   Saxony  at  the 

1  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  489. 


1 88  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

same  time.^  Theology,  moreover,  played  its  part  to 
the  same  end, — a  subject  on  which  Henry  VHI.  grew 
warm  when  he  perceived  that  his  German  friends 
were  a  little  slow  in  responding  to  his  weighty  pro- 
posals. He  employed  Cromwell's  pen  once  more  in 
writing  to  Mont  and  Paynell  to  stir  up  the  Elector  of 
Saxony  and  the  Landgrave.  "  For  the  point  con- 
cerning the  confederation,"  he  wrote,  "  ye  shall 
declare  unto  them  that  the  King's  Highness,  being 
a  prince  that  favoreth  the  preferment  of  the  Word  of 
God  above  all  other  things  in  the  world,  perceiving 
sundry  practices  to  be  devised  and  prepensed  against 
all  princes  that  favored  the  Gospel,  thinking  indeed 
that  hke  as  they  have  been  the  first  that  have  in 
those  parts  earnestly  sticked  unto  it,  and  whom  first 
of  all  the  cruelty  of  the  enemies  of  the  same  would 
invade  and  assay,  afore  any  other,  to  oppress,  sent 
you  thither  to  know  their  minds  and  intentions 
whether  they  will  stick  to  the  same,  as  his  Majesty 
doubteth  not  they  will  do  indeed."  It  was  all  out 
of  the  King's  ardent  desire  for  their  benefit.  "  For, 
thanked  be  our  Lord,"  the  letter  goes  on,  *'  ye  may 
affirm  unto  them,  his  Majesty  feeleth  his  forces  and 
strength  to  be  such  that  in  so  just  a  quarrel  as  the 
maintenance  of  the  Word  of  God  is,  his  Grace  trusteth 
Christ  himself  will  be  so  good  a  protector  and  shield 
to  him  that  he  doubteth  not  but  to  defend  his  own," 
etc.  We  need  quote  no  more  of  the  lengthened-out 
hypocrisy,  which  was  all  intended  to  persuade  the 
Germans  that  they  were  more  concerned  than  the 
King  to  enter  into  a  league  with  him,  though  the 
cause  was  a  common  one,  as  the  Pope  and  his  adherents 
were  most  anxious  for  Henry's  overthrow,  fearing 
that  his  example  might  lead  other  princes  to  abolish 
papal  authority  in  their  realms." 

1  X.  p.,  XIV.  i.  490  (p.  193). 

^  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  580.     For  the  full  text,  see  Merriraan's  Life  and  Letters  of 
Thomas  Cromwell,  ii.  202-206. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  189 

No  cheering  message,  however,  had  yet  arrived 
either  from  the  German  princes  or  from  Denmark, 
when  Mary  of  Hungary,  Regent  of  the  Netherlands, 
intimated  to  the  English  ambassadors  there  that  the 
Emperor  had  desired  her  to  send  for  Chapuys,  his 
ambassador  in  England,  who  would  be  best  able  to 
advise  him  on  the  subject  of  their  negotiations.  Three 
English  ambassadors  had  been  at  the  Brussels  Court 
all  through  the  wmter,  pressing  for  the  marriage 
with  the  Duchess  of  Milan  and  other  means  of 
strengthening  the  old  alliance  between  England  and 
the  House  of  Austria.  They  had  wasted  a  great 
deal  of  time,  and  the  Regent  Mary  and  her  diplo- 
matic councillors  had  done  the  same  with  them,  both 
sides  keeping  up  an  appearance  of  friendly  com- 
munication, out  of  which  some  substantial  result 
was  not  altogether  hopeless,  though  unofficial  signs 
were  numerous  in  Flanders  that  the  King  and  people 
of  England  were  regarded  as  heretics,  and  that  it 
was  expected  both  the  Emperor  and  Francis  I.  would 
shortly  issue  proclamations  against  commercial  inter- 
course with  them.^  Trade,  indeed,  had  already 
suffered  from  an  Imperial  order  published  at  Antwerp 
and  elsewhere  in  those  parts  that  no  ships  should 
leave  the  coasts  till  Easter  without  the  Queen  Regent's 
special  licence ;  ^  and  this,  though  a  general  order, 
told  most  heavily  against  the  English.  At  such  a 
moment  the  recall  of  the  Imperial  ambassador  in 
England  seemed  ominous,  though  it  was  not  accom- 
panied with  any  intimation  of  a  rupture ;  and  still 
more  unpleasant  was  the  fact  that  almost  at  the  same 
time  the  French  ambassador,  Castillon,  had  likewise 
received  his  recall — very  much  to  his  own  satisfac- 
tion.^ It  looked  almost  like  an  arrangement  between  England 
France  and  the  Emperor  for  a  simultaneous  cessation  ^^^''['^ . 
of  diplomatic  relations  with  England. 

1  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  337,  418,  433.  '^  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  287. 

3  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  227. 


190  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

The  English  ambassadors  in  Flanders  were  alarmed 
lest  they  should  be  made  prisoners  when  there  was 
no  one  in  England  to  represent  the  Emperor.  Henry 
and  Cromwell  were  still  more  alarmed  lest  war  should 
be  declared  against  them,  while  they  had  as  yet  no 
assurance  of  support  either  from  Denmark,  Cleves,  or 
the  Lutherans.  They  could  not  forbid  the  return  of 
either  the  French  or  the  Imperial  ambassador ;  they 
could  only  make  remonstrances  to  each  against  France 
and  against  the  Empire  being  left  without  a  repre- 
sentative in  England.  And  to  Castillon,  the  French 
ambassador,  before  his  departure,  Cromwell,  as  an 
act  of  politic  courtesy,  thought  it  advisable  to  show 
his  armoury,  "  which  he  seemed  to  esteem  much," 
assuring  him  that  there  were  more  than  twenty 
private  armouries  as  well  or  better  furnished  within 
the  Kingdom,  belonging  to  lords  and  gentlemen  who 
would  be  found  ready  to  do  the  King  service  on 
any  emergency.  Castillon,  as  Cromwell  wrote  to  the 
King,  "  wondered  and  said  that  he  thought  your 
Grace  the  prince  best  furnished  thereof  in  Christen- 
dom "  ;  but  what  further  comments  he  made  in  his 
own  mind  Cromwell,  of  course,  had  no  means  of 
ascertaining.^ 

After  a  brief  period  of  intense  anxiety,  the  English 
ambassadors  obtained  leave  to  return  from  Flanders 
just  when  Chapuys  reached  Calais,  where  Majoris, 
Dean  of  Cambray,  had  already  arrived  on  his  way  to 
England  as  Chapuys's  successor.  But  there  was  an 
end  of  the  long  hypocrisy  about  forming  a  closer 
alliance,  and  Chapuys,  while  at  Antwerp,  put  a  stop 
to  the  secret  exportation  of  arms  and  gunpowder  to 
England,  which  had  been  going  on  for  some  time  un- 
checked.^ Active  measures  were  taken  for  the  defence 
Alarm  of  of  the  Kingdom,  which  was  believed  to  be  in  imminent 
danger  of  an  invasion.  Musters  were  taken  every- 
where, mariners  were  impressed,  the  coasts  were  forti- 

1  Merriman,  ii.  177.  -  L.  P.,  xiv.  i.  535,  677,  741,  768. 


invasion. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  191 

fied,  and  beacons  laid  ready  to  be  fired,  though  orders 
were  given  out  to  beware  of  false  alarms,  which  would 
be  very  mischievous  by  the  effect  they  would  create 
abroad.  Serious  misgivings  also  prevailed  for  some 
days  as  to  a  great  fleet  about  to  sail  from  Holland. 
But  the  fleet  proved  to  be  friendly,  and  presently 
the  King's  anxieties  were  still  more  relieved  by  a 
further  incident  which  he  had  hardly  expected.^ 

Castillon  had  promised  that  another  French 
ambassador  would  come  in  his  place,  but  no  one 
attached  great  value  to  a  diplomatic  promise.  At  the 
end  of  March,  however,  a  new  French  ambassador.  Anew 
Marillac,  actually  did  arrive  in  London,  and  his  first  JassTdor" 
interview  with  the  King,  which  apparently  was  on  the  dispels 
31st,  completely  dispelled  the  fear  of  anything  like  an  ^^°'''^' 
invasion.  The  King  even  ventured  to  ask  if  Francis 
had  made  any  special  declaration  touching  a  match 
that  he  had  suggested  through  Castillon  with  a  view 
to  an  alliance  against  the  Emperor.  Marillac  confessed 
that  he  had  not,  but  said  that  Francis  thanked  him 
for  his  honourable  offer.  This  answer  Francis  warmly 
approved,  and  urged  Marillac  to  keep  the  King  in 
good  humour,  merely  telling  him,  if  the  subject  were 
again  raised,  that  while  Francis  was  very  grateful  for 
his  offer,  he  did  not  see  how  to  accept  it  in  the  exist- 
ing state  of  his  relations  with  the  Emperor.  By  the 
time  Marillac  had  been  a  month  in  England  a  complete 
change  had  taken  place.  The  Court,  he  said,  seemed 
to  wear  a  new  aspect,  and  everybody  to  be  quite 
delighted.^ 

So  Marillac  wrote  on  the  1st  May.  The  King 
was  now  perfectly  at  ease,  and  had  given  him  a  two 
hours'  interview,  in  which  he  showed  that  his  satis- 
faction was  further  due  to  a  belief  that  the  Emperor 
would  have  enough  on  his  hands  that  year  in  en- 
deavouring to  compose  disputes  in  Germany.     For, 

1  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  398,  400,  529,  540,  564,  573,  615,  652,  655,  682,  691. 
-  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  669,  804,  907-908. 


192  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

A  new        in  fact,  a  new  German  mission  had  arrived  in  London 
embassy  £       davs  ^  before  Marillac   wrote,  Burchart  being 

from  the  .  i        i  i       r>  •  i     i  •  /•         i  •  n 

Lutherans,  agam  at  the  head  oi  it,  and  having  lor  his  colleague 
Ludwig  von  Baumbach,  a  councillor  of  the  Landgrave. 
The  results,  indeed,  this  time,  were  by  no  means 
satisfactory  to  the  envoys  themselves ;  but  the  news 
that  they  brought,  and  even  the  fact  of  their  having 
come,  gave  the  King  perfect  assurance  that  he  had 
nothing  now  to  fear  from  the  Emperor.  Henry 
accordingly  received  them  kindly,  and  did  his  best 
in  conversation  to  nourish  their  distrust  of  the 
Emperor,  so  that  they  were  induced  to  believe,  at 
first,  that  their  mission  was  to  be  crowned  with 
success.  But  both  the  King  and  Cromwell  were  slow 
in  coming  to  business  ;  they  were  very  much  occupied 
with  the  opening  of  Parliament,  which  began  on  the 
28th  April.  And  it  by  and  by  became  manifest  that 
the  business  of  that  Parliament  was  quite  incompatible 
with  the  business  which  these  Germans  came  to  pro- 
mote. For  if  Henry  ever  had  a  thought  of  even 
amusing  them  this  time,  as  before,  with  the  hope  of 
a  religious  agreement,  the  news  of  what  was  done  at 
the  Diet  at  Frankfort  must  have  completely  changed 
his  intention.  That  Diet  had  assembled  in  February, 
having  been  indicted  by  the  Emperor,  who,  with  a 
view  to  secure  peace  in  Germany,  had  sent  thither  as 
his  plenipotentiary,  Vesalius,  titular  Archbishop  of 
Lund  in  Scania,  an  old  councillor  of  his  brother- 
in-law.  Christian  IL,  the  deposed  King  of  Denmark. 
An  agreement  was  not  easily  come  to — both  Catholics 
and  Protestants  were  suspicious  ;  and  the  Archbishop 
had  150,000  ducats  sent  him  by  the  Emperor  to 
keep  an  armed  force  ready  at  Augsburg  in  case  it 
A  religious  should  bc  needed.  But  at  last,  on  the  19th  April,  a 
German  •   trucc  was  agreed  upon  for  fifteen   months,   with   a 

^  Only  two  days  before,  as  Marillac  thought,  but  in  reality  eight  days 
before  ;  for  they  certainly  arrived  on  Wednesday,  23rd  April  {L.  P.,  xiv.  i. 
844,  879).  See  Seckendorff,  iii.  225  ;  and  their  own  account  in  Merriman, 
i.  272. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX   ARTICLES  193 

view  to  a  conference  for  a  religious  settlement ;  one 
condition  of  the  arrangement  being  that  meanwhile 
neither  party  should  receive  a  new  confederate  into 
its  league,^ 

This  provision  was  clearly  intended  to  exclude 
England.  But  even  without  it  the  pacification 
itself  would  have  made  the  Germans  unserviceable 
for  Henry's  purpose ;  and  when  he  knew  that  it  had 
actually  taken  place,  he  made  them  feel  that  he  con- 
sidered further  negotiation  useless.  In  vain  they 
begged  for  a  good  sum  of  money  to  counteract  papal 
practices  and  tyranny.  The  King  pointed  out  that 
there  was  no  appearance  of  reciprocity,  and  the 
ambassadors  saw  that  they  must  return  empty- 
handed.  Indeed,  the  case  was  a  good  deal  worse 
than  mere  failure.  For,  while  they  still  prolonged 
their  stay,  the  discussion  on  the  Six  Articles  came 
on  in  Parliament,  and  when  the  great  questions  of 
the  Sacrament  and  the  marriage  of  priests  were  under 
consideration,  they  felt  that  they  could  not  but  en- 
treat His  Majesty  to  have  regard  only  to  the  truth  in 
such  matters.  This  at  once  involved  them  in  a 
warm  debate  with  the  King  himself  on  the  subject 
of  clerical  matrimony ;  and  finding  at  last  that  their 
continued  presence  in  England  was  useless,  they  took 
leave  and  departed  on  the  last  day  of  May." 

For  Henry's  policy  now  was  altogether  diflerent  winch 
from  what  it  had  been.     Secure  of  the  friendship  of  tJe°J|;^„. 
France,  he  knew  well  enough  that  the  Emperor  could  policy  in 
not  afi'ord  to  quarrel  with   him,  especially  if  given  ^"°^''^"''- 
some  plausible   excuse  for  not  leading  that  crusade 
against  him  which  the  Pope  desired.     The  faith  itself, 
the  Emperor  might  now  say,  was  in  no  danger  under 
Henry's  rule ;  the  King  and  the  Kingdom,  although 
they   rejected   papal    authority,   were  still   perfectly 

1  Sleidan,  Book  xii.  ;  Seckendorff,  iii.  200-204  ;   i.  P.,  xiv.  i.  550,  767, 
768,  786. 

-  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  1091-92  ;  Merriman,  i.  274-7. 

VOL.  II  O 


194  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

orthodox.  And  it  was  not  far  from  the  truth ;  for 
England  was  by  no  means  in  the  same  state  as 
Germany.  Lutheran  views  were  not  in  favour  among 
the  English  people,  and,  severe  as  the  Act  of  the  Six 
Articles  was,  it  was  by  no  means  unpopular  at  its 
enactment.  "  The  people,"  wrote  Marillac,  "  show 
great  joy  at  the  King's  declaration  touching  the 
Sacrament,  being  much  more  inclined  to  the  old 
religion  than  to  the  new  opinions,  which  are  main- 
tained only  by  some  bishops  who  are  little  content 
at  the  refusal  of  their  request  to  marry,  in  order 
afterwards  to  convert  the  property  of  the  Church  into 
patrimony  and  succession." 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  Act  was  one  of 
singular  severity ;  but  severity  commended  itself 
to  public  feeling,  which  found  it  difficult,  if  not 
impossible,  to  disconnect  heresy  from  irreverence,  and 
both  the  one  and  the  other  had  of  late  years  been  far 
too  prominent.  That  this  was  to  be  remedied  now 
was  the  general  belief,  even  before  the  first  steps  had 
been  taken.  "  This  Parliament,"  wrote  John  Husee 
from  London  to  Lord  Lisle,  "  there  shall  be  a 
thorough  unity  and  uniformity  established  for  the 
reformation  of  the  Church  of  this  realm."  ^  Quite  a 
different  "  reformation  of  the  Church  "  from  that  to 
which  the  Germans  were  looking !  But  it  was,  in  its 
origin,  a  lay  movement,  not  a  clerical  one.  On  the 
5th,  after  a  speech  from  the  Lord  Chancellor,  declaring 
that  the  King  desired  above  all  things  the  extirpation 
of  diversities  of  opinion  in  religion,  the  Lords  appointed 
a  committee  consisting  of  Cromwell  as  the  King's 
vicegerent,  the  two  archbishops,  and  six  bishops,  to 
take  the  matter  in  hand.^  But,  as  the  bishops 
appointed  were  half  of  the  new  school  and  half  of 
the  old — for,  ever  since  the  establishment  of  Royal 
Supremacy,  the  persons  appointed  to  bishoprics  had 
been    all    of   "the   New   Learning," — there   was    no 

'  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  922.  -  Loid's  Journals,  i.  105. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX   ARTICLES  195 

appearance  that  they  would  ever  come  to  agreement. 
Seeing  this,  on  the  16th  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  proposed 
to  the  Lords  Six  Articles  for  their  consideration,  and  The  six 
suggested  that  when  they  had  fully  discussed  them  p^^^j" '" 
they  should  pass  a  penal  act  to  enforce  them.^  Thus  ment. 
the  theology  of  the  Church  became  a  matter  for 
the  whole  House,  and  not  for  the  bishops  alone  to 
consider ;  and  it  very  soon  appeared  that,  with  the 
exception  of  the  newly  made  bishops,  the  whole  House 
intended  to  stand  upon  the  ancient  ways.  With 
these  exalted  divines,  however,  the  controversy  was 
acute.  "  There  is  great  hold  among  the  bishops," 
wrote  Husee  on  the  21st,  "for  the  establishment  of 
the  blessed  Sacrament  of  the  Altar.  The  Lords  have 
sitten  daily  in  Council  upon  the  same,  and  the  King's 
Highness  hath  been  with  them  sundry  times  in 
person."  The  King's  appearance  in  the  House  natur- 
ally had  important  results,  and  some  unknown  lord 
writes  as  follows  : — 

And  also  news  here.  I  assure  you,  never  prince  showed 
himself  so  wise  a  man,  so  well  learned  and  so  Catholic  as  the 
King  hath  done  in  this  ParHament.  With  my  pen  I  cannot 
express  his  marvellous  goodness ;  which  is  come  to  such 
effect  that  we  shall  have  an  Act  of  Parliament  so  spiritual 
that  I  think  none  shall  dare  say,  in  the  blessed  Sacrament  of 
the  Altar  doth  remain  either  bread  or  wine  after  the  consecra- 
tion ;  nor  that  a  priest  may  have  a  wife ;  nor  that  it  is 
necessary  to  receive  our  Maker  suh  utrdque  specie ;  nor  that 
private  masses  should  not  be  used  as  they  have  been ;  nor 
that  it  is  not  necessary  to  have  auricular  confession.  And, 
notwithstanding  my  lord  of  Canterbury,  my  lord  of  Ely,  my 
lord  of  Salisbury,  my  lords  of  Worcester,  Rochester  and  St. 
David's  defended  the  contrary  long  time,  yet  finally  his 
Highness  confounded  them  all  with  God's  learning.  York, 
Durham,  Winchester,  London,  Chichester,  Norwich,  and 
Carlisle  have  shown  themselves  honest  and  well  learned 
men.  We  of  the  temporalty  have  been  all  of  one  opinion, 
and  my  lord  Chancellor  and  my  lord  Privy  Seal  as  good  as 
we  can  devise.     My  lord  of  Canterbury  and  all  these  bishops 

1  Lord's  Journals,  i.  109. 


196  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

have  given  their  opinion  and  came  in  to  us,  save  SaHsbury, 
who  yet  continueth  a  lewd  fool,  ilnally,  all  England  have 
cause  to  thank  God,  and  most  heartily  to  rejoice  of  the  King's 
most  godly  proceedings.^ 

This  account  of  the  matter  is  noteworthy,  for, 
whatever  we  think  of  the  writer's  style  and  senti- 
ments, w^e  may  take  it  as  more  accurate  with  regard 
to  positive  facts  than  some  narratives  of  later  date, 
which  have  been  too  generally  accepted.  It  was 
natural,  of  course,  to  endeavour  to  make  a  hero  of 
Cranmer,  whose  admiring  secretary  and  biographer, 
Morice,  mixing  up  the  story  of  his  conduct  in  this 
Parliament  with  his  conduct  a  little  later,  has  led 
Foxe  and  subsequent  historians  to  regard  the  Arch- 
bishop as  the  one  persistent  opponent  of  the  Act, 
"  standing,  as  it  were,  post  alone  against  the  whole 
parliament,  disputing  and  replying  three  days  to- 
gether  against    the  said  Articles."  '^      Cranmer,   un- 

1  Burnet,  vi.  233. 

2  Acts  and  Monuments,  viii.  23.  Compare  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the 
Reformation,  p.  248,  as  to  this  expression  "  post  alone."  In  another  jiart  of  his 
work  {Acts  and  Monuments,  v.  264-5)  Foxe  says  that  "every  man  seeing  the 
King's  mind  so  fully  addicted,  upon  politic  respects,  to  have  these  articles 
pass  forward,  few  or  none  in  all  that  parliament  would  appear,  who  either 
could  perceive  what  was  to  be  defended  or  durst  defend  what  they  under- 
stood to  be  true,  save  only  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  then, 
being  married  (as  is  supposed),  like  a  constant  patron  of  God's  cause,  took 
upon  him  the  earnest  defence  of  the  truth  oppressed  in  the  parliament ; 
three  days  together  disputing  against  those  six  wicked  articles  ;  bringing 
forth  such  allegations  and  authorities  as  might  easily  have  helped  the  cause, 
nisi  pars  major  vicisset,  lU  sxpe  solet,  meliorem  ;  who  in  the  said  disputation 
behaved  himself  with  such  humble  modesty,  and  with  such  obedience  in 
words  towards  his  prince,  protesting  the  cause  not  to  be  his  but  the  cause  of 
Almighty  God,  that  neither  his  enterprise  was  misliked  of  the  King  ;  and 
again,  his  reasons  and  allegations  Avere  so  strong  that  they  could  not  well 
be  refuted.  Wherefore  the  King  (who  ever  bare  special  favor  unto  him),  well 
liking  his  zealous  defence,  only  willed  him  to  depart  out  of  the  parliament 
house  into  the  Council  Chamber  for  a  time  (for  safeguard  of  his  conscience), 
till  the  Act  should  pass  and  be  granted  ;  which  he,  notwithstanding,  refused 
to  do."  It  is  added,  that  after  the  Parliament  was  ended,  the  King  sent 
Cromwell  and  the  Dukes  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  to  dine  with  the  Archbishop 
at  Lambeth  to  assure  him  that  the  King  highly  appreciated  his  conduct  in 
that  Parliament  as  that  of  a  wise  and  learned  man,  and  to  beg  him  not  to  be 
discouraged  by  what  had  passed  in  opposition  to  his  arguments. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  King  "  bare  special  favor  "  to  Cranmer,  and  did 
not  mind  the  opposition  of  one  who,  whatever  he  said,  took  care  to  be  so 
"obedient  to  his  prince." 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  197 

doubtedly,  as  a  married  prelate,  had  very  strong 
personal  reasons  for  opposing  the  Act  as  far  as  he 
possibly  could.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  he  was  only 
one  of  six  bishops  who  opposed  it,  and  that  he,  like 
most  of  the  others,  at  length  gave  in  to  the  general 
opinion.  Bishop  Shaxton  of  Salisbury  being  the  most 
obstinate  in  his  resistance  after  the  others  had  yielded, 
Cranmer  saw  that  he  must  bend  to  the  times.  It 
was  not  unknown  that  he  had  a  wife  or  mistress,  in 
whatever  light  men  might  regard  her,  and  his  case, 
unhappily,  was  not  singular  in  this  respect  (for  it  was 
well  enough  known,  and  had  been  for  generations 
past,  that  many  of  the  clergy,  even  prominent  men 
like  Wolsey,  had  female  companions  by  whom  they 
also  had  children),  except  that  he  would  fain  have 
called  her  his  wife  had  he  been  allowed  to  do  so 
openly.  But  this  was  a  laymen's  Act  of  Parliament, 
and  laymen  did  not  mind  laying  heavy  burdens  on 
the  clergy,  especially  when  they  were  justified  by  the 
canon  law. 

The  effect  of  the  Act  was  precisely  what  the  Effect  of 
anonymous  lord  wrote.  The  preamble  declares  that  ^^<' statute. 
the  articles  had  been  submitted  to  the  clergy,  and 
that  the  King  had  vouchsafed  to  come  in  person 
into  the  Parliament,  and  had  "  declared  many  things 
of  high  learning  and  great  knowledge  touching  the  said 
articles "  ;  and  that  after  long  debate  it  was  finally 
determined  (1)  that  the  natural  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  were  in  the  Sacrament  under  the  forms  of 
bread  and  wine,  and  that  after  consecration  no  sub- 
stance of  bread  and  wine  remained ;  (2)  that  com- 
munion in  both  kinds  was  unnecessary ;  (3)  that 
priests  could  not  marry  by  the  law  of  God ;  (4)  that 
vows  of  chastity  or  widowhood  ought  to  be  kept ; 

(5)  that  private  masses  ought  to  be  continued;  and 

(6)  that  auricular  confession  was  expedient  and  ought 
to  be  retained.  Any  persons  maintaining  opinions 
against  the  first  article  were  to  be  deemed  heretics 


198  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

aud  suffer  death  by  burning  without  any  abjuration, 
benefit  of  clergy  or  sanctuary,  with  confiscation  of 
all  their  lands  and  property.  As  to  the  other  five 
articles,  any  one  maintaining  opinions  against  them 
was  to  be  adjudged  a  felon  and  suffer  death  as  such ; 
the  same  penalty  being  incurred  by  any  man  or 
woman  who,  having  vowed  chastity  or  widowhood 
after  the  12th  July,  should  actually  marry  or 
contract  matrimony.  All  past  marriages  of  such 
persons,  moreover,  were  declared  void ;  and  priests 
keeping  women  with  whom  they  had  contracted 
matrimony  were  declared  felons.^  Here,  of  course, 
was  the  extreme  danger  of  the  Act  for  men  like 
Cranmer,  and  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  he 
was  driven  to  an  artifice  such  as  no  priest  had 
ever  been  compelled  to  resort  to  in  past  times."  A 
proclamation  even  more  rigorous  than  the  Act  was 
issued  at  the  close  of  the  session.  Any  churchman 
found  to  be  on  too  intimate  terms  with  a  married 
woman  was  to  be  punished  with  death ;  and  one 
so  offending  with  an  unmarried  woman  was  for  the 
first  offence  to  lose  his  goods,  both  temporal  and 
spiritual ;  for  the  second,  to  forfeit  his  life.^ 

The  extreme  severity   of  the   Act  was  naturally 

1  Stat.  31  Hen.  VIII.  c.  14. 

-  The  story  of  Archbishop  Cranmer  carrying  about  in  a  chest  the  wife 
whom  he  durst  not  show  openly,  was  supposed  at  one  time  to  rest  only  on  the 
authority  of  Sanders,  who  was  regarded  as  a  malicious  libeller.  But  other 
much  questioned  statements  of  Sanders  have  lately  been  proved  to  rest  on 
conclusive  evidence  ;  and  this  anecdote  is  vouched  for  by  the  earlier  testi- 
mony of  Harpstield  {Prcteiuled  Divo7xe,'p.  275),  derived  from  a  gentleman  who 
was  ])resent  when  the  chest  had  to  lie  conveyed  out  of  danger  from  a  fire  at 
the  Archiepiscopal  palace  at  Canterbury  (an  occurrence  which  took  place  in 
1543).  Parsons  also  mentions  {Three  Conversions,  ii.  371)  as  a  thing  testified 
by  Cranmer's  son's  widow,  then  alive,  that  on  one  occasion  when,  going  to 
Canterbury,  he  carried  his  wife  in  the  chest  down  the  river,  the  shipmen, 
who  were  told  to  take  great  care  of  it  as  containing  my  Lord's  treasure,  after 
landing  it  at  Gravesend,  set  it  up  endlong  in  the  Archbishop's  chamber  with 
the  head  downwards,  so  that  the  woman  was  compelled  to  cry  out  for  fear  of 
having  her  neck  broken.  See  footnotes  in  Lewis'  translation  of  Sander's 
Anglican  Schism,  p.  181. 

•*  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  1207.  There  was  a  clause  in  the  Act  about  priests'  concu- 
bines in  addition  to  the  clauses  above  mentioned  ;  but  the  proclamation  was 
still  more  severe. 


CH.   IV 


ACT  OF  THE  SIX   ARTICLES  199 


resented  deeply  by  all  those  who  sympathised  with 
Lollardy  or  the  New  Learning.  The  name  Lollardy, 
indeed,  was  by  this  time  almost  disused  and  the 
expression  "  the  New  Learning  "  had  generally  taken 
its  place,  as  putting  a  better  face  on  the  same  kind 
of  heresy  ;  for  the  New  Learning  had  already  received 
much  underhand  encouragement  from  the  King  in 
order  to  checkmate  the  influence  of  the  clergy,  and 
its  votaries  were  naturally  disappointed  at  an  Act 
being  passed  so  directly  against  the  sort  of  teaching 
which  they  had  been  zealously  promoting.  The  Act 
and  its  operation  are  accordingly  thus  described  in 
the  work  called  Hall's  Clwonicle  : — 

This  Act  establislied  chiefly  six  articles ;  whereof  among  Account  of 
the  common  people  it  was  called  the  Act  of  Six  Articles,  it  in  Hall's 
and  of  some  it  was  named  the  Whip  with  six  strings,  and  of  ^^'''^o^^'^^^- 
some  other,  and  that  of  the  most  part,  it  was  named  the 
Bloody  Statute ;  for  of  truth  it  so  in  short  time  after 
scourged  a  great  number  in  the  city  of  London,  where  the 
first  quest  for  the  inquiry  of  the  offenders  of  the  said  Statute 
sat  at  a  church  called  Becket's  house,  now  named  the 
Mercers'  chapel,  that  the  said  quest,  being  of  purpose  selected 
and  picked  out  among  all  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
said  city,  that  none  thereof  might  be  admitted  which  either 
had  read  any  part  of  the  Holy  Scripture  in  English,  or  in 
any  wise  favored  such  as  either  had  read  it  or  loved  the 
preachers  of  it :  insomuch  as  this  quest  was  so  zealous  and 
fervent  in  the  execution  of  this  Statute,  that  they  among 
themselves  thought  it  not  only  sufficient  to  inquire  of  the 
offenders  of  the  said  Statute,  but  also  by  their  fine  wits  and 
willing  minds,  they  invented  to  inquire  of  certain  branches 
of  the  same  Statute,  as  they  termed  it,  which  was,  not  only 
to  inquire  who  spake  against  masses,  but  who  they  were 
that  seldom  came  unto  them ;  and  also  not  only  who  denied 
the  Sacrament  to  be  Christ's  very  natural  body,  but  also 
who  held  not  up  their  hands  at  sacring  time  and  knocked 
not  on  their  breasts.  And  they  not  only  inquired  who 
offended  in  the  Six  Articles  but  also  who  came  seldom  to 
the  church,  who  took  no  holy  bread  nor  holy  water,  who 
read  the  bible  in  the  church,  or  in  communication  contemned 
priests  or  images  in  the  churches  etc.,  with  a  great  number  of 


200  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

such  branches.  This  appointed  quest  so  sped  themselves 
with  the  Six  Articles  and  their  own  branches  that  in  fourteen 
days'  space  there  was  not  a  preacher  nor  other  person  in  the 
city  of  name,  which  had  spoken  against  the  supremacy  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  but  he  was  wrapped  in  the  Six  Articles ; 
insomuch  as  they  indicted  and  presented  of  suspicion  to  the 
number  of  five  hundred  persons  and  above.  So  that,  if  the 
King's  Majesty  had  not  granted  his  pardon,  for  that  by  the 
good  Lord  Awdeley,  Lord  Chancellor,  his  Grace  was  truly  in- 
formed that  they  were  indicted  of  malice,  a  great  many  of 
them  which  already  was  in  prison  had  been  shortly  after 
scourged  in  Smithfield  with  fiery  faggots  that  would  have 
made  the  best  blood  in  their  bodies  to  have  sprung.  But 
most  graciously  at  that  time  his  Grace  remitted  all ;  although 
in  the  time  that  these  Six  Articles  endured,  which  was  eight 
years  and  more,  they  brought  many  an  honest  and  simple 
person  to  their  deaths ;  for  such  was  the  rigour  of  that  law  that 
if  two  witnesses,  false  or  true,  had  accused  any  and  avouched 
that  they  had  spoken  against  the  Sacrament,  there  was  then 
no  way  laut  death ;  for  it  booted  not  to  confess  that  his  faith 
was  contrary,  or  that  he  said  not  as  the  accusers  reported. 
For  they  would  believe  the  witnesses ;  yea,  and  sometimes, 
certain  of  the  clergy,  when  they  had  no  witnesses,  would 
procure  some,  or  else  they  were  slandered.^ 

This  is  a  long  extract,  but  the  passage  is  extremely 
important,  first,  because  it  is  the  source,  not  only  of 
much  valuable  information,  but  also  of  a  large  amount 
of  popular  misapprehension  concerning  the  operation 
of  this  celebrated  Act — misapprehension  which  has 
coloured  the  accounts  of  Church  historians  to  the 
present  day,  notwithstanding  what  was  done  long  ago 
by  Dr.  Maitland,  the  learned  Lambeth  librarian,  to 
put  the  matter  in  a  true  light.  One  thing,  however, 
is  evident  at  the  outset.  We  have  here  the  testi- 
mony of  a  well  -  informed  writer,  who  writes  in 
perfect  security  when  the  days  of  persecution  are 
over,  more  than  eight  years  after  the  passing  of  the 
statute,  in  a  spirit  of  fiery  indignation  which  leads 
him  into  long  and  involved  sentences  and  occasion- 

1  Hall's  Chronicle,  p.  828, 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX   ARTICLES  201 

ally  gets  the  better  of  liis  grammar,  whatever  may 
have  been  the  case  with  his  love  of  truth.  More- 
over, without  going  further  than  the  extract,  there 
is  a  strong  appearance  of  bias,  especially  in  the 
last  words,  which  seek  to  fasten  upon  the  clergy, 
with  the  feeble  saving  clause,  "  or  else  they  were 
slandered,"  a  charge  of  procuring  false  witnesses  by 
subornation  of  perjury.  And  there  is  further  an 
insinuation  that  not  only  was  the  law  itself  severe, 
but  the  tribunals  which  administered  it  were  unjust, 
accepting  false  testimony  in  the  face  of  honest  con- 
tradiction, while  the  first  quest  strained  the  law 
far  beyond  its  legitimate  requirements,  and  indicted 
almost  everybody  who  had  been  so  loyal  to  the  King 
as  to  speak  bravely  against  the  authority  of  "  the 
Bishop  of  Rome." 

It  is  right  to  say  that  Edward  Hall  could  hardly  Notreaiiy 
have  been  the  author  of  this  passage,  for  he  died  in  accouut."^" 
1547,  and  it  was  not  till  Christmas  Eve  in  that  year 
that  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  was  repealed.^  So 
that  it  would  seem  the  statement  that  the  Act 
endured  "  eight  years  and  more "  must  have  been 
supplied  by  the  editor,  Richard  Grafton,  when  he 
printed  the  work  from  Hall's  MS.  in  1548.  Indeed, 
Grafton  himself  says,  in  his  preliminary  advertise- 
ment "  To  the  Reader,"  that  Hall  only  completed  his 
work  as  far  as  the  twenty -fourth  year  of  Henry 
VIII.,  i.e.  1532-1533,  leaving  after  that  date  a 
number  of  separate  papers,  which  Grafton  did  his  best 
to  unite  and  put  in  order.  He  adds,  however,  that 
he  did  this  without  making  any  addition  of  his  own 
to  what  Hall  wrote — a  statement  which,  evidently, 
we  must  not  take  too  literally,  when  we  find  a  clause 
that  must  have  been  written  after  the  author's  death. 
That  clause,  at  least,  if  nothing  more,  must  have  been 
an  insertion.  But  I  am  afraid  Grafton's  statement 
that  he  added  nothing  to  what  the  author  had  written 

'  See  Lord's  Journals. 


202  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

cannot  even  generally  be  relied  on.  For  Hall,  however 
bigoted  against  the  clergy,  could  hardly  have  been  in 
his  day  a  reviler  of  the  Six  Articles,  seeing  that  he 
was  one  of  the  citizens  of  London  named  in  1541  in 
the  commission  to  carry  out  the  Act,  and  further  that 
he  was  one  of  the  witnesses  to  the  confession  of  Anne 
Askew,  which  she  made  before  Bishop  Bonner  in 
March  1545.^  Hall,  indeed,  however  willing  to 
depreciate  Church  authority  at  any  time,  was  never 
the  man  to  depreciate  the  authority  of  the  law ;  and 
from  anything  we  know  of  Grafton  we  may  very 
well  suspect  that  his  statement  is  only  an  illustration 
of  what  Sir  Thomas  More  tells  us,  that  he  never  found 
heretics  scrupulous  about  speaking  the  truth.  Grafton, 
moreover,  was  the  King's  printer  when  the  book  was 
issued  in  the  days  of  Protector  Somerset;  and,  of  course, 
he  printed  nothing  but  what  was  agreeable  to  the 
existing  Government.  Now,  under  Protector  Somer- 
set, there  was  a  very  great  change  in  Church  policy, 
and  everything  that  was  prohibited  and  made  penal 
by  the  Six  Articles  was  expressly  sanctioned  by 
Convocation  and  Parliament ;  so  that  it  was  just  the 
time  to  denounce,  in  the  strongest  terms,  a  measure 
which  it  would  have  been  dangerous  to  speak  ill  of  a 
year  before  its  repeal.  Such  denunciations,  in  fact, 
were  positively  required,  and  no  doubt  were  made, 
on  behalf  of  the  Government,  to  justify  what  to 
many  minds  constituted  a  serious  breach  of  ancient 
order.  Still,  of  course,  if  the  Act  had  all  along  been 
felt  to  be  oppressive,  the  sense  of  relief  at  the  end 
of  eight  years  must  have  been  intense,  and  even  a 
few  exaggerations  of  its  past  severity  might  not  have 
been  at  all  unnatural. 

Here,  however,  to  go  no  further  than  the  above 
extract,  we  find  that  the  first  efi"ects  of  the  Act  were 
little  more  than  a  scare.  A  quest  sat  at  the  Mercers' 
Chapel,  the  inquisitors  being  selected  from  those  who 

^  See  Foxe,  v.  440,  543.     App.  ix. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX   ARTICLES  203 

were  not  guilty  of  reading  the  Bible  in  English,  or 
favouring  those  who  did  read  it ;  and  the  gentlemen 
of  this  quest  were  so  zealous  that  they  went  beyond 
the  statute  itself,  and  inquired  into  what  they  called 
its  "branches."  The  inquiry,  it  should  be  observed, 
was  entrusted  by  the  Act  to  commissioners  to  be 
named  by  the  Crown,  in  every  county,  who  should  sit 
four  times  a  year.  They  presented  not  only  those 
who  spoke  against  masses  but  those  who  seldom  came 
to  them ;  not  only  those  who  denied  Transubstantia- 
tion,  but  those  who  did  not  hold  up  their  hands  at 
sacring  time  or  knock  upon  their  breasts.  Nay,  they 
not  only  inquired  who  offended  in  the  Six  Articles, 
but  who  came  seldom  to  church,  who  avoided  taking 
holy  bread  and  holy  water,  who  read  the  Bible  in 
church  (some,  we  know  well,  read  it  noisily  and 
created  a  disturbance),  or  in  their  conversation  with 
others  spoke  contemptuously  of  priests  and  images. 
These  subjects  the  gentlemen  of  the  quest,  it  seems, 
considered  "  branches  "  of  the  Act ;  they  were  anxious, 
in  fact,  that  there  should  be  no  evasion  of  the  law, 
and  they  possibly  went  beyond  the  letter  or  scope 
of  the  law  in  their  presentments.  Still,  if  they  did, 
it  was  at  the  worst  an  error  of  judgment.  They 
were  not  judges,  but  only  acted  the  part  of  a  grand 
jury  to  draw  up  indictments.  And  if  in  a  single 
fortnight  they  presented  no  less  than  five  hundred 
citizens  of  London,  we  can  only  conclude  that  say- 
ings and  practices  which  were  still  considered 
grossly  irreverent,  had  of  late  years  become  so 
exceedingly  common  that  very  numerous  prosecu- 
tions seemed  necessary.  But,  of  course,  it  was 
another  thing  to  carry  them  out  when  the  evil 
had  gone  so  far,  and  the  "good"  Lord  Chancellor 
Audeley  (whose  character  does  not  stand  high  in 
other  things)  procured  from  the  King  a  general 
pardon. 

So  this  "  Bloody   Statute,"  which,  after   all,  was 


204  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  pk.  m 

uot  of  clerical  but  of  lay  manufacture,^  produced  at 
tlie  first  nothing  whatever  but  a  scare,  and  some 
brief  imprisonments.  We  have  already  seen  from 
the  unbiassed  testimony  of  Marillac,  the  French 
The  Act  ambassador,  that  the  Act  was  really  popular.  People 
popSar.  ^i^  ^^o^  ^ove  the  unrestrained  licence  and  offensive 
bigotry  of  the  men  of  the  New  Learning,  and  were  glad 
to  impose  some  check  upon  them.  From  Marillac, 
too,  as  a  very  competent  observer,  we  may  learn 
the  real  object  of  the  Act,  which  he  explains  in  a 
letter  to  the  Constable  Montmorency,  at  the  French 
Court,  written  on  the  13th  July.  By  that  time  it 
would  seem  there  was  so  much  change  in  the  inter- 
national  situation,  that  instead  of  misgivings  being 
entertained  in  England  as  to  the  attitude  of  Francis 
and  the  Emperor,  there  were  now  some  misgivings 
entertained  by  the  Government  in  France,  as  to 
whether  England  was  not  thinking  of  employing  the 
levies  so  recently  raised  in  her  own  defence,  in  an 
invasion  of  their  country.  These  rumours,  which 
only  arose  out  of  old  national  prejudice  among  the 
ignorant  and  ill-informed,  Marillac  was  most  anxious 
to  assure  the  Constable  were  baseless ;  and  thus  he 
writes : — 

As  to  the  talk  which  you  have  been  told  this  King  has 
set  forth  in  his  Parliament  of  making  war  on  France  on 
pretext  of  the  pension  which  has  not  been  paid  him,  be 
assured,  Monseigneur,  that  this  article  was  never  proposed 
in  such  terms,  as  on  my  honor  and  life  I  can  afltirm,  unless 
it  was  in  secret  in  the  Privy  Council  of  this  King ;  and  it  is 
not  likely  that  such  a  thing  should  have  been  resolved  and 
concluded  without  some  indication  being  had  of  it,  as  there  has 
been  of  all  that  has  been  concluded.  And,  certainly,  Mon- 
seigneur, the  principal  matter  put  forward  by  this  King  was 
to  complain  of  the  Pope,  who  endeavoured  to  recall  his  friends 
the  Emperor  and  the  King  (Francis)  from  alliance  with  him 

^  An  anonymous  remonstrance  against  the  proposed  legislation,  which  is 
preserved  in  the  Cottonian  MSS.  (Cleop.  E  v.  50  ;  see  L.  P.,  xiv.  i.  971), 
appears  to  have  originated  in  Convocation,  not  in  Parliament. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  205 

and  get  them  to  make  war  upon  him  on  the  pretext  that 
they  were  all  heretics  and  infidels  here ;  to  show  the  contrary 
of  which  he  desired  that  the  opinions  which  one  ought  to 
hold  in  religion  should  be  determined,  in  order  that  every 
one  should  know  what  to  hold  by,  and  that  Christian  princes 
might  perceive  that  what  the  Holy  Father  put  forth  against 
him  was  untrue.^ 

This  contemporary  diplomatist  understood  thor- 
oughly the  real  aim  of  the  Act.  Henry  was  not 
really  half  so  much  bent  on  putting  down  heretical 
opinions  as  the  title  of  the  Act  would  suggest ; 
but  sacramental  heresies  he  had  always  opposed, 
and  at  this  time  he  was  very  much  concerned  to 
make  it  appear  to  all  the  world  that  he  was  dead 
against  them.  He  must  have  been  perfectly  aware, 
however,  of  the  fact  referred  to  in  the  above  passage 
in  Hall's  Chronicle,  that  his  most  outspoken  champions  The  King 
among  the  clerojy  against  papal  authority  were  the  men  ^^  "^^°\, 

o  o»/     ^o  i.     X  J  against  the 

most  liable  to  indictment ;  and  he  had  no  more  notion  Pope  as 
now  than  ever  of  allowing  papal  authority  again.    On  ^^'®'' 
the  20th  June,  Marillac  writes  to  the  Constable : — 

"  The  day  before  yesterday  there  was  acted  here  a  poor 
upon  the  river  in  their  King's  presence  a  game  of  ^^'^'^^' 
poor  grace  and  much  less  invention,  of  two  galleys, 
one  of  which  bore  the  arms  of  this  King,  the  other 
those  of  the  Pope  with  several  Cardinals'  hats,  as  I 
am  told,  for  I  should  have  considered  it  against  my 
duty  to  be  there  as  a  spectator.  They  made  the 
galleys  fight  together  for  a  long  time,  and  in  the  end 
those  of  this  King  were  victorious,  and  the  Pope  and 
Cardinals,  with  their  arms,  were  all  thrown  in  the 
water,  to  show  by  this  spectacle  to  the  people  that 
the  forces  of  this  King  are  destined  entirely  to  con- 
found and  abolish  the  power  and  name  of  the  Holy 
Father  and  his  adherents."  '^ 

A  courtier's  account  of  the  same  performance  is 
given  in  Wriothesley's  Chronicle  as  follows  : — 

1  Kaulek,  pp.  114,  115.  -  Kaulek,  p.  105. 


2o6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

"This  year  the  17th  day  of  June  was  a  triumph 
on  the  Thames  before  the  King's  palace  at  West- 
minster, where  were  two  barges  prepared  with 
ordnance  of  war,  as  guns  and  darts  of  reed,  one  for 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  his  Cardinals,  and  the  other 
for  the  King's  Grace,  and  so  rowed  up  and  down  the 
Thames  from  Westminster  Bridge  to  the  King's 
Bridge ;  ^  and  the  Pope  [and  his  Cardinals]  made 
their  defiance  against  England  and  shot  their  ord- 
nance  one  at  another,  and  so  had  three  courses  up 
and  down  the  water.  And  at  the  fourth  course  they 
joined  together  and  fought  sore  ;  but  at  last  the  Pope 
and  his  Cardinals  were  overcome  and  all  his  men  cast 
over  the  board  into  the  Thames.  Howbeit,  there  was 
none  drowned,  for  they  were  persons  chosen  who 
could  swim,  and  the  King's  barge  lay  by  hovering 
to  take  them  up  as  they  were  cast  over  the  board. 
Which  was  a  goodly  pastime,  the  King's  Grace  with 
his  lords  and  certain  ladies  standing  on  the  leads  over 
his  privy  stairs,  which  was  covered  with  canvas  and 
set  with  green  boughs  and  roses  properly  made,  so 
that  rose  water  sprinkled  down  from  them  into  the 
Thames  upon  ladies  and  gentlewomen  which  were  in 
barges  and  boats  under  to  see  the  pastime.  And 
also  two  other  barges  rowed  up  and  down  with 
banners  and  pennons  of  the  arms  of  England  and 
St.  George,  wherein  were  the  sackbuts  and  waits, 
which  played  on  the  water.     And  so  finished."  ^ 

This  was  j  ust  after  the  bill  of  the  Six  Articles  had 
passed  the  House  of  Lords,  and  had  been  sent  down 
to  the  Commons.  When  it  became  law  two  bishops 
resigned  their  sees,  Latimer  of  Worcester  and  Shax- 
ton  of  Salisbury.     The  latter,  as  we  have  seen,  was 

^  The  King's  Bridge  was  situated  at  the  eastern  end  of  the  new  Palace  of 
Westminster,  on  the  river  bank,  some  short  distance  from  Old  Palace  Stairs, 
and  was  so  called  in  contradistinction  to  the  Queen's  Bridge  or  Stairs,  situated 
at  the  western  end  of  the  Palace  of  Whitehall.  Westminster  Bridge,  mentioned 
in  our  text,  was  another  of  these  river  stages,  of  which  there  were  several  on 
the  northern  bank  of  the  Thames. — Editorial  Note  in  Wriothesleij. 

2  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  99,  100. 


CH.  IV  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  207 

the  most  persistent  opponent  of  the  passing  of  the 
bill,  even  Latimer's  opposition,  probably,  being  not 
so  marked,  as  the  anonymous  lord  speaks  of  all  the 
others  having  given  in  except  Salisbury.  And 
Shaxton,  most  likely,  had  a  personal  reason  for  his 
opposition  which  Latimer  had  not ;  for,  unless  he 
married  at  a  later  date,  he  had  a  wife  or  mistress 
at  this  time,  but  Latimer  had  kept  his  vow  of 
chastity.  All  bishops,  however,  would  be  called 
on  to  administer  the  Act  after  it  became  law ; 
and  both  Latimer  and  Shaxton  preferred  to  give 
up  their  bishoprics.  They  were  now  in  some  danger, 
and  Latimer  made  his  escape  to  Gravesend,  but  was 
arrested,  either  there  or  at  Rochester,  and  brought 
back.^  They  were,  however,  pensioned,-  and  remained 
for  some  years  in  obscurity,  at  first  in  the  custody  of 
two  other  bishops. 

When  the  news  reached  Germany  of  the  passing 
of  the  Act,  it  filled  the  Reformers  there  with  dismay.  Dismay 
Melancthon  wrote  a  long  and  earnest  expostulation  '^^^'^ 

-r-r  q  •!         •  T  1  German 

to  Henry,  attributing  the  enactment  to  the  procure-  Protestants 
ment  of  the  bishops,  and  grieving  to  think  that  the  ^*  ^^^  ^'^*- 
King  had  been  abused  by  their  sophistries,  just  as 
Darius  had  been  induced  by  his  satraps  to  cast 
Daniel  to  the  lions.  Of  course  the  remonstrance 
had  little  or  no  effect ;  but  it  was  not  unheeded,  for 
Grafton  afterwards  got  into  trouble  for  printing  it.'* 

How  entirely  mistaken  Melancthon's  idea  was 
that  the  bishops  were  the  originators  of  the  Act 
we  have  seen  already.  It  was  rather  passed  by  the 
laity  to  correct  disorders  arising  from  the  fact  that 
episcopal  authority  had  for  some  years  been  paralysed 
by  Royal  Supremacy.  Until  the  bishops'  hands  were 
tied  no  such  Act  would  have  been  necessary.  Till 
then,  cases  of  heresy,  sacramental  or  other,  were  dealt 

1  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  1217,  1219,  1227-28. 
'  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  236,  p.  73. 

^  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  444.     Tlie  full  text,  tiauslatcd  into  English,  will  be  found 
in  Foxe,  v.  3.50.  ■"  L.  P.,  xvi.  422,  424. 


2o8  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  in 

with  simply  as  they  arose,  without  any  general 
sessions  to  present  offenders,  and  the  prosecutions 
were  comparatively  few.  Now  the  numbers  pre- 
sented were  simply  unmanageable  if  there  had  been 
any  design  to  prosecute  in  every  case.  But  how 
Small  little  the  Act  was  in  some  cases  effectual,  even  as 
^roduced  ^  scarc,  we  learn  from  the  curious  instance  of  John 
by  it.  Harridaunce,  the  inspired  bricklayer  of  Whitechapel, 
who,  within  a  week  or  two  after  it  passed,  preached 
out  of  his  window  to  an  audience  collected  in  the 
street  to  hear  him  between  nine  and  twelve  o'clock 
at  night.  He  also  at  times  preached  at  the  back 
of  his  garden,  and  said  in  reference  to  the  two 
bishops  who  had  resigned :  "  No  marvel  if  the 
world  doth  persecute  holy  men  and  setters  forth 
of  light :  for  Christ  said  '  They  shall  come  after  Me, 
which  shall  persecute  the  tellers  of  truth.'  "  This 
was  pretty  bold ;  but  when  a  neighbour,  a  baker 
apparently,  once  warned  him  that  he  was  breaking 
the  commandments  of  the  Council,  he  answered,  "  It 
is  as  fit  for  me  to  be  burnt  as  for  thee  to  bake  a  loaf." 
Altogether,  Harridaunce  confessed,  on  examination, 
that  he  had  preached  about  twenty  times  in  this  way, 
between  midsummer  and  the  13th  August.^ 
John  This  John  Harridaunce,  whose  surname  was  some- 

times ignorantly  split  in  two,  and  who  w^as  called 
Harry  Daunce  or  Henry  Daunce,  even  by  friends  who 
knew  him,  had  been  imprisoned  two  years  before  for 
the  very  same  offence.  He  disturbed  the  neighbour- 
hood by  his  preaching,  and  had  done  so  all  the  more 
to  spite  his  parson,  who,  he  said,  denounced  him  as  a 
heretic  from  the  pulpit.  When  examined  on  that 
occasion  by  the  Lord  Mayor  as  to  how  he  had  learned 
to  preach,  he  said  that  for  thirty  years  he  had  been 
seeking  to  learn  Scripture,  but  could  not  read  or 
write  ;  nevertheless,  he  kept  a  New  Testament  always 
about  him.     He  would  begin  his  sermon,  it  appears, 

1  Z.  p.,  XIV.  ii.  42  (1,  2). 


Hairi 
dauuce. 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  209 

"  In  nomine  Patris  et  Filius  et  Spiritus  Sanctus. 
Amen."  ^  His  imprisonment  in  1537  tad  not  in  the 
least  deterred  him  from  repeating  his  performances  in 
1539.  And  though  a  fanatical  and  illiterate  brick- 
layer might  seem  hardly  worthy  of  the  historian's 
notice,  even  when  the  history  of  religion  is  his 
subject,  it  would  really  be  a  mistake  to  pass  him 
by  as  altogether  insignificant.  For  the  business  of 
a  bricklayer,  illiterate  though  he  might  be,  lent  itself 
readily  to  the  aid  of  men  of  the  New  Learning,  in  a 
way  that  might  not  at  once  occur  to  us.  When 
heretics  held  secret  meetings  to  read  dangerous  books 
at  midnight,  they  would  naturally  take  care  to  have 
made  "  a  very  secret  place  to  keep  them  safe  in."  ^ 
And  this  was  precisely  the  service  that  a  sympathetic 
bricklayer  could  do  them. 

Thus  in  Queen  Mary's  time,  Edward  Underbill, 
"  the  hot  gospeller,"  tells  us  what  he  did  when  the 
persecution  began  : — 

Wherefore  I  got  old  Henry  Daunce,  the  bricklayer  of 
Whitechapel,  who  used  to  preach  the  gospel  in  his  garden 
every  holyday,  where  I  have  seen  a  thousand  people,  he  did 
enclose  my  books  in  a  brick  wall  by  the  chimney's  side  in 
my  chamber,  where  they  were  preserved  from  moulding  or 
mice  until  the  first  year  of  our  most  gracious  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, etc.,  notwithstanding  that  I  removed  from  thence  and 
went  unto  Coventry.^ 

Harridaunce,  therefore,  escaped  serious  molestation 
notwithstanding  his  notoriety  and  the  crowds  he 
sometimes  collected,  not  only  during  the  whole  period 
when  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  was  the  law  of  the 
land,  but  even  in  the  trying  time  of  Queen  Mary, 
at  least  till  the  persecution  began,  of  which  he  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  a  victim.     In  1539  the  parson 

1  L.  p.,  X.  594,  624. 

^  See  Dalaber's  account  of  Garret's  escape  in  Foxe,  v.  422.     Many  books 
were  found  at  that  time  hid  under  the  earth.     L.  P.,  iv.  4004. 
*  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  p.  171. 

VOL.  II  P 


2IO  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 


of  Whitechapel  would  have  taken  counsel  about  him 
with  Bishop  Stokesley,  but  the  bishop  was  on  his 
deathbed/  He  was,  nevertheless,  compelled  to  abjure 
heresy,  no  doubt  by  Bishop  Bonner,  even  in  Henry 
Vni.'s  day;^  and,  like  a  great  many  others,  did  his 
best  for  the  cause  of  heresy,  even  after  abjuration. 

The  Act  of  the  Six  Articles,  while  it  was  law,  was 
undoubtedly  pressed  in  one  or  two  instances  with 
extreme  severity.  But  it  may  be  said  with  tolerable 
confidence  that,  even  in  the  year  when  it  was  enacted, 
there  was  not  half  so  much  persecution  of  new  religion 
as  there  was  of  old.  There  was,  indeed,  a  brief  pause, 
just  about  the  time  that  the  Act  was  passed,  in  the 
process  of  taking  forced  surrenders  of  monasteries, 
which  had  been  going  on  for  more  than  a  year.  Only 
two  surrenders  seem  to  have  been  taken  in  April,  and 
none  at  all  in  May  or  June.  This  may  have  been 
due  to  the  acute  fear  of  invasion  which  afterwards 
passed  away.  But  in  July  the  work  began  again, 
a  leading  agent  now  being  Dr.  London,  warden  of 
Surrenders  Ncw  Collcge,  Oxford,  wliosc  main  qualification  for 
the  business  seems  to  have  been  complete  subservience 
to  authority.  He  had  been  an  eager  heresy  hunter  in 
1528  when  Garret  escaped  from  Oxford  (an  incident 
well  known  to  readers  of  Foxe),  and,  as  we  shall  see, 
he  was  an  eager  heresy  hunter  at  a  later  date.  But 
at  present  his  business  was  to  suppress  monasteries, 
and  he  had  begun  in  1538 — the  year  before  that 
which  we  have  reached — by  dissolving  the  Friars' 
houses  at  Oxford,  and  then  visiting  with  a  body  of 
followers  the  neighbouring  nunnery  of  Godstow,  with 
a  commission,  as  he  said,  to  suppress  it.  The  Abbess, 
though  promoted  by  Cromwell  himself,  did  not  like 
his  ways  and  refused  to  surrender  the  house  to  him, 
as  he  was  an  old  enemy  of  hers ;    on  which  he  not 


of  moiias 
teries 
taken 
by  Dr. 
London 


1  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  42. 

"^  His  name  occurs  in  a  list  given  by  Foxe  (iv.  585)  of  "such  as  were 
forced  to  abjure  in  King  Henry's  days." 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  211 

only  used  threats,  but  tried  to  inveigle  her  and  her 
sisters  one  by  one  in  a  way  she  had  never  heard  of. 
Cromwell  was  obliged  to  listen  to  her  complaint,  and 
Dr.  London  was  ordered  to  withdraw.^  Yet,  when 
the  work  of  suppressing  monasteries  began  again, 
after  the  pause,  in  July  1539,  not  only  did  Dr. 
London  take  the  lead,  but  nunneries  seem  to  have 
been  committed  to  him  as  a  principal  charge ;  for  in 
Lincolnshire,  the  Midlands,  Bedfordshire,  and  Bucking- 
hamshire he  took  surrenders  of  eleven  houses,  seven 
of  which  were  nunneries.  Indelicacy,  it  would  seem, 
was  no  disqualification  for  such  business. 

Monasteries  in  general  were  going  down.  Evi- 
dently they  were  all  to  be  got  rid  of  In  the 
summer  it  seems  to  have  been  suspected  that  the 
abbots  of  three  great  houses  were  encouraging  each 
other  by  secret  messages  not  to  surrender.  Needless 
to  recount  in  detail  what  took  place  with  regard  to 
them.  We  may  learn  it  from  Cromwell's  memoranda 
written  beforehand : — 

"  The  Abbot  [of]  Reading  to  be  sent  down  to  he 
tried  and  executed  at  Reading  with  his  complices. 

"  Item,  the  Abbot  of  Glaston  to  he  tried  at  G las- 
ton,  and  also  executed  there  with  his  complices." 

And  so  Richard  Whiting,  Abbot  of  Glastonbury, 
was  hanged  with  two  of  his  monks  on  Tor  Hill  in 
the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  his  own  monastery, 
while  Hugh  Cook,  Abbot  of  Reading,  suffered  the  Three 
like  fate  at  the  gate  of  his,  with  two  priests  of  J!;^g*j 
Reading.  The  third  abbot  was  Thomas  Beach  or 
Marshall,  Abbot  of  Colchester,  whose  execution  took 
place,  apparently  at  Colchester,^  a  very  little  later. 
Of  course  there  was  not  much  refusal  to  surrender 
after  that,  and  in  the  spring  of  1540  there  were 
no  more  monasteries  in  England. 

We  must  do  justice,  however,  even  to  Henry  VIII. 
An  Act  was  passed  in  Parliament  in  the  same  session 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  758,  911.  ^  x.  P.,  xiv.  ii.  App.  45. 


212  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

as  that  of  the  Six  Articles,  empowering  the  King 
Henry  to  make  new  bishoprics  by  letters  patent  out  of  the 
^heme  confiscatcd  property  of  the  monasteries,  and  a  draft 
of  new  scheme  of  new  bishoprics,  with  alteration  of  the  stafifs 
bishoprics.  ^£  ^j^  oncs,  remains  to  this  day  among  the  records  of 
the  realm.  The  cathedral  of  Christchurch,  Canter- 
bury, was  to  be  altered,  the  monks  being  replaced  by 
a  provost  and  twelve  prebendaries,  with  six  preachers 
and  various  readers  and  students,  Rochester  was 
to  undergo  similar  changes.  A  new  see  of  West- 
minster was  to  be  created,  and  one  at  Waltham  for 
Essex.  Winchester  and  Worcester  were  to  have 
secular  chapters.  Gloucester,  St.  Albans,  Oxford, 
and  Peterborough  were  to  become  bishoprics.  The 
monks  of  Ely  were  to  give  place  to  a  college  with 
a  provost,  ten  prebendaries,  a  reader  and  ten 
students  of  divinity,  forty  scholars  in  Greek  and 
Latin,  and  a  fixed  staff  of  canons,  choristers,  and 
the  like.  Burton-upon-Trent  was  to  be  a  college 
likewise,  and  so  was  Chester.  Shrewsbury  was  to 
have  a  bishop,  six  prebendaries,  a  reader  of  divinity, 
six  divinity  students  (three  to  be  found  at  Oxford 
and  three  at  Cambridge),  a  schoolmaster  and  thirty 
scholars,  an  usher,  eight  petty  canons,  and  so  forth. 
Carlisle  and  Durham  were  to  become  colleges.^  These 
projects  in  a  few  years  were  somewhat  modified.  In 
the  end  six  new  bishoprics  were  created,  and  they 
all  exist  to  this  day  except  Westminster,  which 
endured  only  for  about  ten  years,  and  was  abolished 
by  Edward  VI. 

Thus  Henry's  good  intentions  in  this  matter 
took  their  time,  and  were  only  partly  fulfilled  after 
all.  His  real  objects  in  passing  the  Act  of  the  Six 
Articles  were  accomplished  at  once.  It  was  popular. 
It  served  the  Emperor  as  a  pretext  for  not  treating 
the  King  of  England  as  an  enemy  to  Christianity. 

^  Henry  VIII.'s  Scheme  of  the  Bishoprics,  privately  printed  by  Henry  Colo 
in  1838  ;  L.  P.,  xiv.  ii.  429. 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  213 

Politically,  its  only  drawback  was  that  it  offended  his 
German  friends  whom  he  was  so  anxious  to  cultivate  in 
order  to  keep  the  Emperor  in  check.  But  the  worst 
that  even  Melancthon  had  heard  of  its  effects  when  he 
wrote  to  Henry  on  the  1st  November  to  remonstrate 
against  it,  was  that  Latimer,  Shaxton,  Crome,  and 
others,  doubtless  of  excellent  learning,  whose  names 
he  had  not  heard,  had  been  committed  to  custody.^ 
Still,  his  disappointment  was  serious  seeing  that,  in 
the  spring  of  that  same  year,  he  had  been  expressing 
ardent  hopes  that  the  King  would  come  to  an  agree- 
ment with  himself  and  Luther  in  doctrine,  and 
complete  the  work  of  reformation  by  throwing  off 
the  superstitious  rites  and  beliefs  of  Kome,  as  he 
had  already  done  her  jurisdiction.^  And  Dr.  Barnes,  Barnes 
who  had  been  busy  on  the  Continent  trying  to  J^voS. 
promote  a  league  between  England  and  the  German 
Protestants — what  became  of  him  now?  He  re- 
turned home  soon  after  the  passing  of  the  Act, 
and  the  King  refused  to  see  him — or  else  he  had  not 
the  courage  to  seek  an  audience.^ 

He  had  been  Henry's  agent,  at  least,  in  establish- 
ing a  friendly  understanding  with  Christian  IH.  of 
Denmark.  But  the  King  was  shut  out  of  the 
Protestant  '  League  by  the  terms  of  the  truce  of 
Frankfort ;  and  even  the  bright  prospects  held  out 
to  the  Duke  of  Cleves  failed  for  a  time  to  meet  with 
the  response  that  might  have  been  expected.  For 
though  the  Duke  was  not  himself  an  avowed  Pro- 
testant, his  eldest  sister  Sibylla  w^as  married  to  John 
Frederic,  Elector  of  Saxony,  who  had  a  contingent 
reversion  in  Cleves  and  required  to  be  consulted  as  to 
the  marriage  of  any  of  his  wife's  sisters,  which  he  was 
bound,  by  his  own  marriage  settlement,  to  assist.'* 
But  after  the  Frankfort  truce,  when  the  Duke  of 
Cleves  wanted  his  advice,  the  Elector  took  himself 

1  i.  p.,  XIV.  ii.  444.  2  ip^^  XIV.  i.  613,  666,  737. 

3  i.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  400,  pp.  139,  140.  *  L.  P.,  xiv.  ii.  220. 


214  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

out  of  the  way.  He  had,  no  doubt,  other  reasons, 
and  weighty  ones,  for  repairing  to  his  own  country, 
especially  the  death  of  his  cousin,  Duke  George  of 
Saxony  (of  the  Albertine  branch),  which  materially 
strengthened  the  Protestant  interest  in  Germany ;  ^ 
but  it  may  also  be  surmised  that  he  was  not  anxious 
at  that  time  to  promote  a  match  of  somewhat  doubt- 
ful bearings  on  German  tranquillity.  A  few  months 
later,  however,  the  Pope  urged  the  Emperor  not  to 
confirm  but  to  annul  the  Frankfort  truce,  as  it  was 
intended  to  pave  the  way  for  a  religious  settlement 
apart  from  him ;  ^  and  it  was  soon  apparent  that 
England  and  the  Protestants,  however  little  the 
latter  believed  in  Henry's  religious  sincerity,  might 
have  as  much  need  of  each  other's  help  as  ever.  For 
Charles  V.  was  in  Spain,  most  anxious  to  reach  the 
Low  Countries  to  quell  a  dangerous  outbreak  at 
Unwonted  Ghent,  of  which  Francis  I.  had  not  only  refused  to 
of ?ranci^  take  advantage,  but  had  even  given  the  Emperor 
L^and  ^^  noticc,  and  had  invited  him  to  pass  through  France 
in  order  to  subdue  it.  This  invitation  he  gladly 
accepted,  and  the  French  and  Imperial  ambassadors 
in  England  went  together  to  the  King  to  inform  him 
of  the  proposed  Imperial  journey.^ 

Observers  were  astonished  and  at  first  incredulous. 
The  two  rivals  seemed  completely  to  have  forgotten 
old  grudges,  the  Emperor  trusting  himself  unre- 
servedly to  the  loyalty  and  good  faith  of  Francis 
in  passing  through  his  country,  while  Paris  was 
making  great  preparations  to  receive  the  Imperial 
guest  with  all  possible  honour.  Not  only  had  Ghent 
good  reason  to  fear  his  resentment  as  soon  as  he 
should  reach  the  Low  Countries,  but  the  Duke  of 
Cleves  might  well  expect  to  be  driven  from  his  new 
acquisition  of  Gueldres,  and  Henry  VIII.  might  have 
to  face  even  yet  a  combination  of  the  Emperor  and 

1  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  920.  2  2,.  p.,  XIV.  ii.  69  (2). 

■*  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  508. 


Charles  V. 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  215 

Francis  to  execute  the  papal  sentence  against  him 
and  turn  him  out  of  his  kingdom.  Henry,  however, 
was  not  at  all  dismayed.  The  tempting  bait  held 
before  Cleves  was  working.  Even  on  the  29th  July 
the  Elector  of  Saxony  had  written  to  the  Duke 
promising  to  send  him  some  of  his  Council  expressly 
for  the  King's  matter;^  and  on  the  4th  September 
the  Duke  sent  ambassadors  to  England  to  conclude 
the  match.  The  treaty  was  actually  concluded  in 
London  on  the  4th  October.^ 

Anne  of  Cleves  crossed  from  Calais  to  Deal  in  the 
very  end  of  December.  On  the  last  day  of  the  year 
she  reached  Eochester,  where  the  King  visited  her 
incognito,  returning  afterwards  to  Greenwich.  On 
the  3rd  January  1540  he  received  her  in  procession 
at  Blackheath,  and  conducted  her  through  Greenwich 
Park  to  the  Palace.  On  the  6th  they  were  married,  The 
while  the  Emperor  was  in  Paris  receiving  the  splendid  with  Tnne 
hospitality  of  Francis.  of  cieves ; 

The  marriage,  of  course,  irritated  the  Emperor 
extremely ;  but  it  served  its  purpose — the  only 
purpose  really  for  which  it  was  contracted.  It  gave 
England  the  support,  not  only  of  the  Duke  of  Cleves 
but  of  all  his  Protestant  kinsmen  and  allies  against 
any  attempt  to  give  effect  to  the  papal  excommuni- 
cation. It  also  gave  secret  satisfaction  to  Francis,  as 
he  found  in  the  course  of  time  that  his  generosity 
towards  the  Emperor  had  been  entirely  misplaced. 
If  he  hesitated  at  first  to  renew  old  intrigues  with 
German  princes,  England  had  now  done  all  that 
was  needful  to  strengthen  them  against  their  superior 
lord.  All  the  trouble  that  Charles  V.  and  Maximilian 
before  him  had  ever  experienced  from  Charles,  Duke 
of  Gueldres,  who,  in  alliance  with  France,  had  fre- 
quently invaded  the  lands  of  the  House  of  Austria, 
might  now  be  expected  from  William,  Duke  of  Cleves, 
the  claimant  of  Gueldres,  supported  by  his  brother- 

1  L.  p.,  XIV.  ii,  33.  2  ^_  p^  XIV.  ii.  127-8,  286. 


2i6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  m 

in-law,  Henry  VHI.  of  England.  And  William,  Duke 
of  Cleves,  would  be  further  supported  by  the  Elector 
of  Saxony,  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse,  and  the  King  of 
Denmark. 

So  it  seemed.  But  neither  princes  and  statesmen 
abroad  nor  his  own  subjects  at  home  could  read  the 
secrets  of  Henry's  heart.  He  did,  indeed,  reveal  to 
Cromwell,  and  in  the  most  disgusting  fashion,  the 
secrets  of  his  own  bed-chamber ;  but  the  world  was 
none  the  wiser.  That  he  was  disappointed  with  his 
wife  as  regards  her  beauty  at  the  very  first  sight  of 
her,  is  a  statement  that  rests  only  on  his  own 
authority,  and  may  or  may  not  be  true.  What  is 
true,  or  may  be  pretty  distinctly  read  through  all 
those  shameful  private  revelations,  is  that  he  was 
determined  from  the  first  to  keep  it  in  his  power  to 
make  out  a  case  of  nullity,  which  he  might  get  his 
Parliament  and  the  clergy,  if  needful,  to  endorse. 
a  marriage  Thc  marriage  was  to  be  declared  a  sham  marriage 
He^^^  whenever  it  had  served  its  purpose — whenever,  that 
yiii.  never  ig  to  Say,  the  King  was  of  opinion  that  the  alliance 
\o  be  ^  of  the  German  princes  might  be  safely  dropped,  for 
bouBd.  the  sake  of  more  comfortable  relations  with  the 
Emperor.  And  time  gradually  brought  the  matter 
about.  For  months  Cromwell's  policy  and  the  Anne  of 
Cleves  marriage  remained  suspended  in  the  balance. 
For  months  it  was  uncertain  whether  they  would  be 
maintained  or  condemned  together.  Strano^e  vacilla- 
tions  were  noted  from  day  to  day.  Cromwell  was 
made  Earl  of  Essex  in  April,  but  Bishop  Gardiner, 
who  had  been  long  excluded  from  the  Council,  was 
taken  again  into  favour.  Sampson,  Bishop  of 
Chichester,  was  one  morning  nominated  as  the 
first  Bishop  of  Westminster ;  two  hours  later  he 
was  disgraced  and  imprisoned.  Ambassadors  came 
from  the  Duke  of  Cleves  to  demand  help  from  the 
King  to  secure  Gueldres,  but  they  received  only  a 
cold  answer.     At  last,  on  the  10th  June,  Cromwell 


cH.iv  ACT  OF  THE  SIX  ARTICLES  217 

was  arrested  on  the  ground  that  lie  had  been  counter- 
working the  King's  endeavour  to  procure  a  settlement 
of  religion.  On  the  6th  July  a  Commission  was 
issued  requiring  the  clergy  of  England,  in  General 
Synod  assembled  (in  accordance  with  a  request 
from  Parliament,  passed  at  a  secret  meeting),  to 
inquire  as  to  the  validity  of  the  King's  marriage. 
The  Synod  met  next  day  in  the  Westminster  Chapter- 
house, and,  with  all  forms  duly  observed,  pronounced 
the  marriage  invalid.  The  evidence  had  been  ob- 
tained from  Cromwell  in  writings  under  his  own 
hand,  after  his  committal  to  the  Tower.  Then,  on 
the  28th,  Cromwell  was  beheaded.  Two  days 
later  Dr.  Barnes,  with  two  other  divines  of  the  new 
school,  went  to  the  fire  in  Smithfield,  where,  on  the 
same  day,  Powell,  Abell,  and  Fetherstone,  three 
notable  adherents  of  the  Pope,  were  hanged  for 
denying  the  King's  Supremacy. 

The  repudiation  of  Anne  of  Cleves  was  a  thing 
for  which  even  Henry's  previous  matrimonial  vagaries 
had  not  prepared  the  world.  Imperial  statesmen 
were  amused.  Covos,  the  Emperor's  secretary  in 
Spain,  remarked  that  it  was  not  without  a  reason 
that  the  King  of  England  claimed  spiritual  authority 
to  judge  of  the  validity  of  marriages  after  his  own 
will ;  but  the  result  could  not  but  be  good  for  the 
Emperor  in  his  dispute  with  Cleves.  The  same 
consideration,  however,  told  very  difi'erently  upon 
Francis  I.,  to  whom  Sir  Edward  Carne  had  to  report 
that  the  question  of  the  validity  of  Henry's  marriage 
was  committed  to  the  clergy.  "  What !  "  said  Francis, 
"  the  matrimony  with  the  Queen  that  now  is  ? " 
"  Yea,"  replied  Carne.  "  Then  he  fetched  a  great 
sigh,  and  so  spake  no  more."  ^ 

1  L.  p.,  XV.  870. 


BOOK  IV 
THE  REIGN   OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE 


CHAPTER   I 

THE   STORY   OF   THE    ENGLISH   BIBLE 

The  fall  of  Cromwell  did  not  end  tlie  religious 
despotism  which  Royal  Supremacy  had  set  up,  but 
made  it  for  a  while  less  arbitrary.  The  need  of  a 
religious  settlement  was  felt  more  and  more.  The 
Act  of  the  Six  Articles,  even  before  Cromwell  fell, 
was  one  great  efifort  to  steady  matters  upon  the  old 
lines.  But  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  when  the 
power  of  bishops  and  clergy  had  already  been  broken 
by  one  Act  of  Parliament,  the  state  of  religion  could 
be  effectually  mended  by  another.  That  Act,  no 
doubt,  was  fairly  effective  at  first  against  most  of  the 
things  at  which  it  was  aimed ;  its  stringency,  indeed, 
had  to  be  relaxed  by  a  new  enactment  taking  away 
the  capital  penalty  for  priestly  incontinence.^  It 
completely  shut  the  mouths  of  Calvinists  and 
Sacrament aries,  one  of  whom,  writing  to  Bullinger  at 
Zurich,  attributes  the  result  to  their  depending  too 
much  on  the  support  of  influential  persons.  "  We 
did  not  consider,"  he  wrote,  "  that  it  was  the  Lord's 
teaching.  But  as  soon  as  He  had  destroyed  the 
hopes  we  had  reposed  in  one  individual,  we  raised  up 
to  ourselves  another  in  whom  we  placed  our  con- 
fidence ;  until  at  last  God  has  taken  them  all  away 
from  us,  and  has  inflicted  upon  us  such  a  want  of 
sincere  ministers  of  the  Word,  that  a  man  may  now 
travel  from  the  East  of  England  to  the  West,  and 

1  Stat.  82  Hen.  VIIL  c.  10. 
221 


222   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

from  the  North  to  the  South,  without  being  able  to 
discover  a  single  preacher,  who  out  of  a  pure  heart 
and  faith  unfeigned  is  seeking  the  glory  of  God.  He 
has  taken  them  all  away.  And  here  I  mean  Queen 
Anne  who  was  beheaded,  together  with  her  brother ; 
also  the  Lord  Cromwell,  with  Latimer  and  the  other 
bishops."  ^ 

There  could  hardly  be  more  convincing  evidence 
than  this,  that  the  kind  of  religion  favoured  by  the 
writer  was  not  popular  in  England,  and  had  only 
received  factitious  support  from  Anne  Boleyn  and 
Cromwell,  and  such  of  the  bishops  as  had  owed  their 
advancement  to  Anne  Boleyn's  influence  over  the 
King.  But  if  further  evidence  be  required,  it  is  to 
be  found  in  an  account  transmitted  to  Cromwell  by 
the  notorious  heretic,  George  Constantine,  of  his 
conversations,  just  after  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  the 
Six  Articles,  with  John  Barlow,  Dean  of  Westbury, 
a  brother  of  Bishop  Barlow,  and  Thomas  Barlow, 
prebendary  there,  another  brother,  while  they  were 
all  three  on  a  journey  from  Westbury-on-Trym  in 
Gloucestershire  to  Slebech  in  South  Wales.  They 
had  conversed  about  the  resignations  of  the  two 
bishops,  Latimer  and  Shaxton ;  about  the  return  of 
Dr.  Barnes  from  the  Continent ;  and,  finally,  about  the 
new  Act,  with  regard  to  which  they  were  all  agreed 
it  was  well  that  there  was  no  commission  yet  issued 
to  put  it  in  force  ; — and  the  Dean  blamed  Archbishop 
Cranmer  for  allowing  it  to  pass,  believing  that  he 
might  have  effectually  opposed  it.  But  Constantine 
showed  that  opposition  would  have  been  useless,  and 
that  my  Lord  Privy  Seal  (that  is  to  say,  Cromwell) 
was  fully  persuaded  that  the  Act  was  right.  "It  is 
marvel  if  it  so  be,"  remarked  the  Dean.  In  reply  to 
which  Constantine  observed :  "  Wonderful  are  the 
ways  of  the  Lord !  Kings'  hearts  are  in  the  hand  of 
God.     He  turneth  them  as  He  lusteth.     How  merci- 

1  Original  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  pp.  203,  204. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        223 

fully,  how  plentifully  and  purely  hath  God  sent  His 
Word  to  us  here  in  England  !  Again,  how  unthank- 
fully,  how  rebelliously,  how  carnally,  and  unwillingly, 
too,  we  receive  it !  Who  is  there,  almost,  that  will 
have  a  Bible,  but  he  must  be  compelled  thereto  ? 
How  loth  be  our  priests  to  teach  the  commandments.  The  New 
the  Articles  of  the  Faith,  and  the  Paternoster  in  u^popui^, 
English !  Again,  how  unwilling  be  the  people  to 
learn  it !  Yea,  they  jest  at  it,  calling  it  the  new 
Paternoster  and  New  Learning ;  so  that,  as  help  me 
God,  if  we  amend  not,  I  fear  we  shall  be  in  more 
bondage  and  blindness  than  ever  we  were.  I  pray 
you,  was  not  one  of  the  best  preachers  in  Christendom 
the  Bishop  of  Worcester  (meaning  Latimer)  ?  And 
now  there  is  one  made  ^  that  never  preached  that  I 
heard,  except  it  were  the  Pope's  law.  But,  alas ! 
beside  our  naughtiness,  cowardness  and  covetousness 
is  the  occasion  of  much  of  this.  The  cowardness  of 
our  bishops  to  tell  truth  and  stand  by  it  while  they 
might  be  heard,  and  the  covetousness  of  our  visitors ; 
for  in  all  our  visitations  we  have  nothing  reformed 
but  our  purses." 

"  By  God's  mercy,"  the  Dean  rejoined,  "  thou 
say  est  truth."  ^ 

There  were  many  extremely  interesting  things  in 
the  conversation  besides  this,  which  it  is  hardly 
possible  to  pass  by  altogether  without  notice  ;  for 
never  was  there  reported  at  length  in  King  Henry's 
days  a  conversation  of  such  high  significance  in  refer- 
ence to  so  large  a  number  of  subjects.  They  went  on 
to  talk  of  the  prospect  of  the  King's  marrying  again. 
The  Dean  understood  that  both  the  Duchess  of 
Milan  and  Anne  of  Cleves  were  spoken  of;  and  there 
was  good  hope  of  the  latter  match,  for  the  King's 
painter  (Holbein)  had  been  sent  over  to  take  her  like- 
ness.    Moreover,  the  Duke  of  Cleves  favoured  God's 

^  John  Bell,  Latimer's  successor  in  the  bishopric. 
^  Archceologia,  xxiii.  56-9. 


224  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Word,  and  was  a  mighty  prince  now,  having  possession 
of  Gueldres  against  the  Emperor's  will.  The  match 
with  the  Duchess  of  Milan  was  really  broken  off 
because  she  would  have  the  King  accept  the  Pope's 
dispensation.  Moreover,  she  required  pledges.  "  Why 
pledges  ? "  asked  the  Dean.  "  Marry,"  replied  Con- 
stantine ;  "  she  sayeth  that  the  King's  Majesty  was 
in  so  little  space  rid  of  the  Queen's,  that  she  dare  not 
trust  his  Council,  though  she  durst  trust  his  Majesty. 
For  her  Council  suspecteth  that  her  great  aunt 
(Katharine  of  Aragon)  was  poisoned  ;  that  the  second 
(Anne  Boleyn)  was  innocently  put  to  death,  and  the 
third  lost  for  lack  of  keeping  in  her  childbed."  ^ 

I  must  break  off  here,  though  there  was  much 
else  on  subjects  of  first-rate  importance,  especi- 
ally as  to  the  circumstances  leading  up  to  the 
execution  of  Anne  Boleyn  and  her  supposed  para- 
mours— a  matter  about  which  Constantine  could  tell 
something,  as  he  was  then  servant  to  Henry  Norris, 
one  of  the  victims.  What  we  have  to  consider  at 
present  is  the  evidence  these  documents  afford,  in 
harmony  with  the  testimony  of  Marillac,  the  French 
ambassador,  that  the  repressive  legislation  of  the  Act 
of  the  Six  Articles,  instead  of  being  disliked,  was 
popular  ;  that  the  people  did  not  love  the  Bible  and  the 
Paternoster  in  English,  which  were  really  forced  upon 
them  against  their  will ;  and  that  they  thought  it  no 
more  than  right  to  punish  married  priests  or  men 
who  introduced  new  sacramental  doctrine.  The  only 
thing  wonderful  was  that  legislation  to  that  effect 
should  have  passed  with  the  approbation  of  the  King 
and  Cromwell,  when  the  influence  of  authority  had 
so  long  been  turned  in  the  contrary  direction. 
Wonderful,  indeed,  Constantine  might  well  consider 
it,  how  God  turned  the  hearts  of  kings !  For  few 
indeed  knew  all  about  the  Frankfort  truce  and  its 
effect  on  the  King's  policy ;  but  it  was  an  effect  for 

1  Archceologia,  xxiii.  60,  61. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        225 

which  almost  every  one  was  thankful.  And,  of 
course,  when  they  censured  the  irreverence  and 
profanity  of  past  years  they  laid  the  blame  on  the 
King's  minister,  not  on  the  King.  On  Cromwell's 
fall,  next  year,  they  could  speak  their  minds  freely. 
The  Act  of  his  attainder^  declared,  among  other  things,  How 
that  being  a  detestable  heretic,  determined  to  sow  ^uYe™^^'^'* 
sedition  and  variance  among  the  King's  subjects,  he  hated. 
had  secretly  set  forth  and  dispersed  into  all  the  shires 
numbers  of  false  and  erroneous  books,  many  of  which 
were  printed  beyond  seas,  to  alienate  men  from  "  the 
true  and  sincere  faith  "  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament  of 
the  Altar  and  other  Articles  of  Religion  declared  by 
the  King  by  the  authority  of  Parliament.  He  had 
also  caused  parts  of  the  said  books  to  be  translated 
into  English ;  and,  even  on  the  report  made  by  the 
translator  thereof  that  the  matter  was  expressly 
against  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  he  had,  after 
reading  the  translation,  affirmed  the  heresy  so  trans- 
lated to  be  good.  He  had  also  "  obstinately  holden 
opinion  and  said "  that  every  Christian  might  be  a 
minister  of  the  Sacrament  as  well  as  a  priest,  and, 
abusing  his  authority,  as  the  King's  Vicegerent,  to 
reform  errors  and  direct  ecclesiastical  causes,  he  had, 
without  the  King's  knowledge,  licensed  heretics  to 
preach  and  teach.  Nay,  he  had  written  to  the 
sheriffs  of  sundry  shires,  as  if  it  were  the  King's 
pleasure,  to  set  at  large  many  false  heretics,  and  had 
defended  such  persons  and  rebuked  their  accusers. 
He  had  defended  the  preaching  of  Barnes,  then  in  the 
Tower,  declaring  that  even  if  the  King  turned  against 
it,  he  would  fight  for  it,  and,  holding  up  his  dagger, 
added,  *'  Or  else  this  dagger  thrust  me  to  the  heart  ; 
and  I  trust  if  I  live  one  year  or  two,  it  shall  not  lie 
in  the  King's  power  to  resist  or  let  it  if  he  would  " — 
affirming  the  words  by  a  great  oath.^ 

1  Stat.  31  Hen.  VIII.  c.  62. 
2  Burnet,  iv.  417-9.     The  Act  is  32  Hen.  VIII.  c.  62. 

VOL.  II  Q 


226  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Of  course  we  do  not  expect  to  find  justice  in  an 
Act  of  Attainder.  The  old  fiction  that  the  minister 
acted  "  without  the  privity  of  the  King  "  was  always 
ready,  however  glaringly  untrue.  But  that  Cromwell's 
great  influence  had  been  used  in  promoting  heresy 
such  as  was  generally  abhorred  by  honest  people 
there  is  really  no  doubt  whatever.  Yet  his  acts  stood 
for  the  acts  of  the  nation,  and  gave  England  a  bad 
name  among  the  nations.  On, his  fall  Richard  Pate, 
who  was  then  at  Bruges  ambassador  to  the  Emperor, 
wrote  to  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  that  while  Cromwell 
ruled,  England  had  always  been  ill  spoken  of  abroad, 
people  saying  that  in  that  country  the  Sacrament 
of  the  Altar  was  abolished,  and  all  piety  and 
religion  banished.  When  people  visited  England 
they  said  they  would  take  their  chaplains  with 
them  to  say  mass  in  their  chambers,  expecting 
that  they  would  have  no  opportunity  in  church.^ 
Now,  he  hoped,  foreigners  would  think  better  of 
the  country.  And  doubtless  there  was  some  im- 
provement. 

At  the  same  time,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  Act  of 
the  Six  Articles,  severe  as  it  was  against  sacramental 
heresies  and  married  priests,  gave  no  kind  of  security 
against  an  English  Bible  or  against  the  spread  of  that 
"New  Learning"  which  was  founded  on  its  literal 
interpretation.  The  English  Bible,  in  fact,  as  we 
have  seen,  was  actually  forced  upon  a  reluctant 
Progress  of  pcoplc,  and  though  the  New  Learning  was  not 
Le*in^g.'"  y^^  ^y  ^^y  i^eans  popular,  it  was  a  growing 
force.  But  how  this  came  about,  or  what  led 
up  to  it,  deserves  some  further  consideration  than 
we  have  yet  bestowed  on  the  subject.  And  for 
this  purpose  we  must  go  back  to  the  history  of 
past  years. 

To  translate  Scripture  into  English  as  a  matter  of 
private   enterprise   and   circulate   it  in  any  diocese 

1  i,  p.,  XV.  876. 


cH.i       STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        227 

without  the  approval  of  the  bishop,  had  always  been 
accounted,  as  we  have  already  had  occasion  to 
observe,  conduct  distinctly  heretical  and  opposed  to 
the  good  order  of  the  Church,  whether  the  trans- 
lation was  good  or  bad.  But  there  was  always  a 
good  deal  of  heretical  feeling  in  places,  and  especially 
among  city  merchants  like  Hunne,  who  hated  spiritual 
courts  and  spiritual  parade.  Now  Tyndale,  who  led 
the  way  at  this  time  in  translating  and  printing  the 
Bible,  was  encouraged  by  at  least  one  city  merchant 
— possibly  by  more.  He  had  gone  abroad  in  1524,  Tyndaie's 
assured  of  remittances  from  one  Humphrey  Mon-  '^^^^"^y- 
mouth,  to  pursue  a  work  which  he  could  not  safely 
prosecute  at  home.  He  took  counsel  in  the  matter 
with  Luther  at  Wittenberg,  where,  it  would  rather 
seem,  he  printed,  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  1525, 
an  English  translation  of  the  two  first  gospels  on  the 
model  of  Luther's  New  Testament  of  1522.  This 
translation  was  quite  distinct  from  his  edition  of  the 
whole  New  Testament — a  work  which  he  began  a 
little  later  at  Cologne,  where,  as  is  well  known,  he 
was  interrupted  in  the  printing  of  it,  and  obliged  to 
remove  to  Worms.  There  it  was  completed,  and  it 
appears  to  have  been  smuggled  into  England  in  the 
early  part  of  1526.  But  of  the  3000  quarto  and 
3000  octavo  copies  printed  at  Worms  only  one  imper- 
fect quarto  and  two  octavo  copies  are  known  now  to 
exist.  For  as  soon  as  it  was  discovered  that  such  a 
work  was  disseminated  in  England  the  bishops  took 
pains  to  get  it  suppressed.  Tunstall,  who  was  then 
Bishop  of  London,  denounced  it  in  a  sermon  at  Paul's 
Cross,  declaring,  as  it  would  appear  by  Roye's  satire, 
that  he  found  3000  errors  in  it ;  and  after  the  sermon 
a  bonfire  was  made  of  the  volumes.  On  the  3rd 
November  1526  a  mandate  was  issued  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  his  suffragans  to  search 
for  this  and  other  prohibited  books ;  but  the  Arch- 
bishop  was    anticipated   by   Tunstall,    who   on   the 


228  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

24th  October/  without  attributing  the  work  to 
Tyndale  (could  he  have  been  at  that  date  ignorant  of 
its  authorship  ?),  notified  his  Archdeacon  of  London 
that  "  many  children  of  iniquity,  maintainers  of 
Luther's  sect,  blinded  through  extreme  wickedness 
and  wandering  from  the  way  of  truth  and  the 
Catholic  faith,  craftily  have  translated  the  New 
Testament  into  our  English  tongue,  intermeddling 
therewith  many  heretical  articles  and  erroneous 
opinions,  pernicious  and  offensive,  seducing  the  simple 
people,  attempting  by  their  wicked  and  perverse 
interpretations  to  profanate  the  majesty  of  the 
Scripture  which  hitherto  hath  remained  undefiled, 
and  craftily  to  abuse  the  most  holy  Word  of  God  and 
the  true  sense  of  the  same  ;  of  which  translation  there 
are  many  books  imprinted,  some  with  glosses  and 
some  without,  containing  in  the  English  tongue  that 
pestiferous  and  most  pernicious  poison  dispersed 
throughout  all  our  diocese  of  London  in  great 
numbers,"  ^  The  city  merchants  who  had  encouraged 
Tyndale  in  his  labours,  and  sent  him  remittances 
from  England,  of  course  knew  how  to  import  and 
disseminate  his  books. 

Tunstall's  words  no  doubt  strike  the  modern  reader 
as  strangely  vehement.  Yet  he  was  really  one 
of  the  mildest  of  the  whole  bench  of  bishops,  and 
his  words  are  not  more  severe  than  those  of  Sir 
Thomas  More,  who  was  not  a  bishop  at  all.  Nor 
were  these  the  only  men  of  the  day  who  saw  clearly 
that  Tyndale's  Testament,  like  his  other  works,  was 
intended  to  produce  an  ecclesiastical  and  social  revolu- 
tion, of  a  highly  dangerous  character,  aided  by  mis- 
translations of  Holy  Writ  and  sophistical  glosses  in 
the  margin.  For  us  who  live  long  after  such  a  revolu- 
tion has  been    actually   accomplished,    who   do   not 

^  It  was  known  in  London  even  on  the  3rd  September  that  the  English 
Testaments  were  to  be  put  down  and  burned.     L.  P.,  iv.  4693,  4694. 

^  Foxe,  iv.  666-7.  In  the  general  account  of  Tyndale  I  have  followed 
Demaus's  Life  of  him  (Lovett's  ed. ). 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        229 

realise  the  agony  of  the  crisis,  and  to  whom  even 
such  of  the  mistranslations  as  remain  do  not  vitiate 
the  general  sense  of  writings  which  we  feel  to  be 
inspired,  it  is  difficult  to  realise  the  causes  of  alarm. 
Yet,  looking  back,  we  ought  to  be  aware  that  the 
great  shipwreck  of  the  old  system  really  did  produce 
disastrous  and  demoralising  results ;  that  it  set  men 
afloat  in  tempestuous  seas  on  rafts  made  of  the  broken 
timbers  of  what  had  once  been  St.  Peter's  ship  ;  that 
the  attempt  to  preserve  the  unity  and  independence 
of  a  national  Church  only  led  to  cruelty  and  repres- 
sion ;  and  that  at  last  we  have  found  peace — if  we 
have  found  it  even  now — in  what  might  almost  be 
called  the  principle  of  an  agnostic  State  trying  to 
hold  the  balance  even  between  contending  denomina- 
tions. But  one  thing  is  certain — that  the  pre-Eefor- 
mation  system  is  dead  and  cannot  possibly  be  revived. 

Archbishop  Warham  not  only  took  active  steps  to  Efforts  to 
suppress  the  new  translation,  but  believed  presently  ^g^^few 
that  he  had  succeeded  in  purchasing  the  whole  impres-  Testament, 
sion  of  each  edition  with  a  view  to  its  destruction. 
The   following   letter   from   Kichard   Nix,   the   aged 
Bishop  of  Norwich,  shows  how  warmly  he  was  seconded 
in  this  enterprise  : — 

Bishop  Nix  to  Akchbishop  Warham 

In  right  humble  manner  I  commend  me  mito  your  good 
Lordship,  doing  the  same  to  understand  that  I  lately  received 
your  letters  dated  at  your  Manor  of  Lambeth  the  26  th  day 
of  the  month  of  May,  by  the  which  I  do  perceive  that  your 
Grace  hath  lately  gotten  into  your  hands  all  the  books  of  the 
New  Testatment  translated  into  English,  and  printed  beyond 
the  sea, — as  well  those  with  the  glosses  joined  unto  them,  as 
the  other  without  the  glosses,  by  means  of  exchange  by  you 
made  therefor,  to  the  sum  of  £66  :  9  : 4. 

Surely,  in  mine  opinion,  you  have  done  therein  a  gracious 
and  a  blessed  deed,  and  God,  I  doubt  not,  shall  highly  reward 
you  therefor !  And  where  in  your  said  letters  ye  write 
that  in  so  much  as  this  matter  and  the  danger  thereof,  if 


230  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

remedy  had  not  been  provided,  should  not  only  have  touched 
you,  but  all  the  bishops  within  your  province ;  and  that  it 
is  no  reason  that  the  whole  charge  and  cost  thereof  should 
rest  only  in  you,  but  that  they  and  every  of  them  for  their 
part,  should  advance  and  contribute  certain  sums  of  money 
toward  the  same ;  and  for  that  intent  desire  me  to  certify 
you  what  convenient  sum  I,  for  my  part,  will  be  contented 
to  advance  in  this  behalf,  and  to  make  payment  thereof  unto 
Master  William  Potkyn,  your  servant;  pleaseth  it  you  to 
understand  that  I  am  right  well  contented  to  give  and 
advance  in  this  behalf  ten  marks,  and  shall  cause  the  same 
to  be  delivered  unto  the  said  Master  Potkyn  shortly;  the 
which  sum  I  think  sufficient  for  my  part,  if  every  bishop 
within  your  said  province  make  like  contribution  and 
advancement,  after  the  rate  and  substance  of  their  benefices. 
Nevertheless,  if  your  Grace  think  this  sum  of  ten  marks  not 
sufficient  for  my  part  in  this  matter,  your  further  pleasure 
known  I  shall  be  as  glad  to  conform  myself  thereunto,  in 
this  or  any  other  matter  concerning  the  Church  as  any  your 
subject  within  your  province ;  as  know  Almighty  God,  who 
long  preserve  you  to  his  most  pleasure  and  your  heart's 
desire.  At  Hoxne  in  Suffolk,  the  Hth  day  of  June  1527. 
Your  humble  obediencer  and  bondman, 

R.  NORVICEN.l 

Addressed :  To  my  Lord  of  Canterbury's  good  Lordship.^ 

It  is  strange  that  Archbishop  Warham  should 
have  imagined,  that  he  had  succeeded  in  getting 
into  his  hands  the  whole  impression  of  two  separate 
editions  of  a  work  like  Tyndale's  New  Testament. 
Apparently  he  and  the  bishops  were  quite  mistaken 
in  thinking  so ;  but,  stranger  still  is  it,  if  we  may 
trust  a  story  to  be  presently  related,  that  the  discovery 
of  their  error  did  not  prevent  a  repetition  of  the 
same  expensive  and  futile  policy  by  Tunstall  two 
years  later.  Not  less  notable,  however,  is  the  self- 
denying  zeal  of  the  bishops,  who  were  willing  to  tax 
themselves  so  bighly  in  order  completely  to  eradicate 

^  The  signature  of  this  letter  ia  in  a  very  shaky,  irregular  hand,  the  poor 
old  bishop  no  doubt  at  that  very  time  getting  blind,  as  he  afterwards  became. 
I  have  omitted  to  quote  a  short  P.S.  regretting  his  inability  to  come  up  and 
"do  his  duty"  to  Warham  that  summer. 

-  MS.  Cott.,  Vitellius  B.  ix.  117.* 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        231 

what  they  regarded  as  a  source  of  pestilent  error. 
Bishop  Nix's  offered  contribution  of  ten  marks,  or 
o£6:13:4 — rather  more  than  a  tenth  of  the  whole 
sum  laid  out  by  the  Primate,  but  Norwich  un- 
doubtedly was  a  rich  diocese, — corresponded  prob- 
ably to  ten  or  twelve  times  that  nominal  value  in 
our  day;  and  on  the  same  scale  we  may  reckon  that 
the  whole  sum  laid  out  by  the  Primate  was  equivalent 
to  at  least  £700  or  £800  of  modern  currency.  But 
the  literature  read  in  their  dioceses  was  still  a  subject 
of  anxious  consideration  for  conscientious  bishops ; 
and  until  the  King  himself  became  a  patron  of 
heresy,  they  could  mark  as  contraband  and  get  the 
aid  of  the  civil  power  to  suppress,  alike  in  England 
and  in  foreign  countries,  all  that  was  considered 
really  dangerous.  The  invention  of  printing,  however, 
had  already  begun  to  make  such  measures  exceed- 
ingly difficult.  Merchants  and  tradesmen  in  London 
had  been  sending  orders  abroad  for  copies  of  Tyn- 
dale's  New  Testament,  and  some  of  their  correspond- 
ence on  the  subject  was  discovered  in  1528  in  the 
house  of  one  Kichard  Harman  at  Antwerp,  which  was 
searched  by  authority  procured  from  the  Margrave 
in  order  to  seize  his  books  and  papers.^ 

In  February  1528  Garret's  escape  from  Oxford 
created  much  disturbance  in  the  University,  and 
led  to  the  disclosure  of  a  large  underhand  sale 
of  Lutheran  books  partly,  at  least,  procured  from 
Harman.^  But  that  story  is  not  specially  con- 
nected with  the  New  Testament.  Tyndale  is  said 
to  have  been  at  that  time  at  Marburg,  where,  it  is 
supposed,  he  got  Hans  Luft  to  print  for  him  his 
Parable  of  the  Wicked  Mammon  and  his  Obedience 
of  a  Christian  Man.  In  1529  it  would  seem  that 
he  must  have  paid   a  visit   to   Antwerp,   and   been 

1  L.  P.,  IV.  4693,  4694. 

"^  L.  P.,  IV.  4030.  For  the  story  of  Garret  and  Farman,  pastor  of  Honey- 
lane,  see  their  names  in  the  index  to  that  volume  ;  also  Dalaber's  narrative 
in  Foxe,  which,  however,  is  written  much  later. 


232  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

there  in  August,  when  Bishop  Tunstall  was  there  also 
on  his  return  from  Cambray,  where  he  and  Sir  Thomas 
More  were  present  on  behalf  of  England  at  the  negotia- 
tions between  the  Emperor  and  Francis  I.  Here  some 
very  remarkable  proceedings  took  place,  which  are  told 
with  great  gusto  by  Hall  the  chronicler  as  follows  : — 

Here  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  at  this  present  time 
William  Tyndale  had  newly  translated  and  imprinted  the 
New  Testament  in  English ;  and  the  Bishop  of  London,  not 
pleased  with  the  translation  thereof,  debated  with  himself 
how  he  might  compass  and  devise  to  destroy  that  false  and 
erroneous  translation  (as  he  said).  And  so  it  happened  that 
one  Augustine  Packington,  a  mercer  and  merchant  of  London, 
and  of  a  great  honesty,  the  same  time  was  in  Antwerp  where 
the  Bishop  then  was ;  and  this  Packington  was  a  man  that 
highly  favored  William  Tyndale,  but  to  the  Bishop  utterly 
showed  himself  to  the  contrary.  The  Bishop,  desirous  to 
How  it  have  his  purpose  brought  to  pass,  commoned  of  the  New 
was  bought  Testaments  and  how  gladly  he  would  buy  them.  Packing- 
Tunstaii  ^°^  then  hearing  that  [which]  he  wished  for,  said  unto  the 
Bishop  "  My  Lord,  if  it  be  your  pleasure,  I  can  in  this  matter 
do  more,  I  daresay,  than  most  of  the  merchants  of  England 
that  are  here ;  for  I  know  the  Dutchmen  and  strangers  that 
have  bought  them  of  Tyndale  and  have  them  here  to  sell. 
So  that,  if  it  be  your  Lordship's  pleasure  to  pay  for  them, 
for  otherwise  I  cannot  come  by  them  but  I  must  disburse 
money  for  them,  I  will  then  assure  you  to  have  every  book 
of  them  that  is  imprinted  and  is  here  unsold."  The  Bishop, 
thinking  that  he  had  God  by  the  toe,  when,  indeed,  he  had 
(as  after  he  thought)  the  Devil  by  the  fist,  said  "  Gentle 
Master  Packington,  do  your  diligence  and  get  them,  and 
with  all  my  heart  I  will  pay  for  them  whatsoever  they  cost 
you,  for  the  books  are  erroneous  and  nought,  and  I  intend 
surely  to  destroy  them  all,  and  to  burn  them  at  Paid's  Cross." 
Augustine  Packington  came  to  William  Tyndale,  and  said 
"  William,  I  know  thou  art  a  poor  man,  and  hast  a  heap  of 
New  Testaments  and  books  by  thee,  for  the  which  thou  hast 
both  endangered  thy  friends  and  beggared  thyself;  and  I 
have  now  gotten  thee  a  merchant  which  with  ready  money 
shall  despatch  thee  of  all  that  thou  hast,  if  you  think  it  so 
profitable  for  yourself."  "  Who  is  the  merchant  ? "  said 
Tyndale.     "  The  Bishop  of  London,"  said  Packington.     "  Oh, 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE        233 

that  is  because  he  will  burn  them,"  said  Tyndale.  "Yea, 
marry,"  quod  Packington.  "  I  am  the  gladder,"  said  Tyn- 
dale, "  for  these  two  benefits  shall  come  thereof :  I  shall  get 
money  of  him  for  these  books  to  bring  myself  out  of  debt, 
and  the  whole  world  shall  cry  out  upon  the  burning  of  God's 
Word.  And  the  overplus  of  the  money  that  shall  remain 
to  me  shall  make  me  more  studious  to  correct  the  said  New 
Testament,  and  so  newly  to  imprint  the  same  once  again, 
and  I  trust  the  second  will  much  better  like  you  than  ever 
did  the  first."  And  so,  forward  went  the  bargain.  The 
Bishop  had  the  books,  Packington  had  the  thanks,  and 
Tyndale  had  the  money.^ 

A  capital  story  this,  which,  it  need  hardly  be 
suggested,  has  lost  nothing  in  the  telling.  Yet, 
doubtless,  it  is  a  true  story  in  the  main,  for  there 
are  evidences  that  go  some  way  to  establish  it,  while 
there  are  certainly  points  which  are  wrong  in  detail. 
Hall,  it  will  be  seen,  relates  it  in  connection  with  the 
events  of  1529,  just  as  if  there  had  been  no  other 
buying  and  burning  of  the  books  before.  And  further, 
he  caps  it  with  a  sequel  which  is  all  that  is  required 
to  make  it  still  more  effective  : — 

Afterward,  when  mo  New  Testaments  were  imprinted, 
they  came  thick  and  threefold  into  England.  The  Bishop 
of  London,  hearing  that  still  there  were  so  many  New  Testa- 
ments abroad,  sent  for  Augustine  Packington,  and  said  unto 
him  "  Sir,  how  cometh  this,  that  there  are  so  many  New 
Testaments  abroad,  and  you  promised  and  assured  me  that 
you  had  bought  all  ? "  Then  said  Packington  "  I  promise 
you  I  bought  all  that  then  was  to  be  had,  but  I  perceive 
they  have  made  more  since ;  and  it  will  never  be  better  as 
long  as  they  have  the  letters  and  stamps.  Therefore  it  were 
best  for  your  Lordship  to  buy  the  stamps  too,  and  then  are 
you  sure."  The  Bishop  smiled  at  him  and  said  "Well, 
Packington,  well,"  and  so  ended  this  matter. 

Shortly  after,  it  fortuned  one  George  Constantine  to  be 
apprehended  by  Sir  Thomas  More,  which  then  was  Lord 
Chancellor  of  England,  of  suspicion  of  certain  heresies. 
And  this  Constantine  being  with  More,  after  divers  exami- 
nations of  divers  things,  among  other  Master  More  said  in 

1  Hall's  Chronicle,  pp.  762,  763. 


234  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

this  wise  to  Constantine :  "  Constantine,  I  would  have  thee 
plain  with  me  in  one  thing  that  I  will  ask  of  thee,  and 
I  promise  thee  I  will  show  thee  favor  in  all  the  other 
things  whereof  thou  art  accused  to  me.  There  is  beyond  the 
sea  Tyndale,  Joye,  and  a  great  many  mo  of  you.  I  know 
they  cannot  live  without  help.  Some  sendeth  them  money 
and  succoureth  them ;  and  thyself,  being  one  of  them,  hadst 
part  thereof,  and  therefore  knowest  from  whence  it  came. 
I  pray  thee,  who  be  they  that  thus  help  them?"  "My 
Lord,"  quod  Constantine,  "  will  you  that  I  shall  tell  you  the 
truth  ? "  "  Yea,  I  pray  thee,"  quod  my  Lord.  "  Marry,  I 
will,"  quod  Constantyne.  "  Truly,"  quod  he,  "  it  is  the  Bishop 
of  London  that  hath  holpen  us ;  for  he  hath  bestowed  among 
us  a  great  deal  of  money  in  New  Testaments  to  burn  them ; 
and  that  hath  [been],  and  yet  is,  our  only  succour  and  com- 
fort." "  Now,  by  my  troth,"  quod  More,  "  I  think  even  the 
same,  and  I  said  so  much  to  the  Bishop  when  he  went  about 
to  buy  them." 

It  may  be  remarked,  however,  that  Bishop  Tunstall 
could  scarcely  have  been  such  a  simpleton  as  to  have 
no  misgivings  as  to  the  effect  of  his  policy,  even  if 
Sir  Thomas  More  had  not  suggested  to  him  how  it 
would  probably  turn  out.  It  was  his  duty,  he  con- 
ceived, to  suppress  the  edition,  even  at  considerable 
expense  to  himself,  if  he  could  possibly  do  so.  It 
may  or  may  not  be  the  case  that  he  was  at  first 
deceived  as  to  the  character  of  Augustine  Packington, 
that  merchant  "  of  a  great  honesty,"  who,  according 
to  Hall,  "  highly  favored  William  Tyndale,  but  to 
the  Bishop  utterly  showed  himself  to  the  contrary  " 
(Hall's  notions  of  "great  honesty"  seem  to  have  been 
quite  compatible  with  double  dealing) ;  but  it  is  evi- 
dent, even  in  the  narrative,  that  when  Packington 
wished  to  lead  him  on  to  get  "the  letters  and  stamps," 
meaning,  apparently,  the  types  and  presses,  the  Bishop 
had  no  mind  to  trust  him  further.  The  smile  with 
which  he  said  "  Well,  Packington,  well ! "  is  exceed- 
ingly significant.^ 

^  The  notices  of  Augustine  Packington  in  records  and  State  papers  are  a 
little  curious.     On  the  12th  October  1525  we  meet  with  a  grant  to  John  and 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        235 

The  difficulties  bishops  had  to  contend  with  in  The 
doing  what  had  always  been  esteemed  their  duty —  thwarted 
that  is  to  say,  suppressing  literature  which  was  con-  by  the 
sidered  poisonous — were  becoming  simply  insuperable  pj^g|°^ 
when  the  printing  press,  from  various  hidden  quarters, 
diffused  such  literature  in  numerous  and  multiplied 
copies,  and  nothing  but  strong  government  at  home, 
aided  by  the  friendly  efforts  of  continental  govern- 
ments as  well,  could  be  expected  eflectually  to  put 
down  this  contraband  industry  and  traffic.     But  now 
on  the  Continent  there  were  places  of  refuge  like 
Wittenberg,  or  Marburg  in  the  land  of  Hesse,  fully 
protected  by  Protestant  princes ;  and  at  home,  even 
while  the  old  regime  continued,  Henry  YHL,  with  a 
view  to  getting  married  to  Anne  Boleyn,  was  secretly 
encouraging  heresy  while  openly  putting  forth  pro- 
clamations against  it.     The  bishops  were  beginning 
to  feel  the  altered  nature  of  the  ground,  and  "  Well, 
Packington,  well,"  was  all  that  could  be  said. 

In  truth,  it  may  reasonably  be  suspected  that  the 
joke  of  compelling  bishops  to  contribute  to  the  com- 
mercial success  of  a  publication  which  they  detested 
was  a  part  of  the  speculation  of  Monmouth  and 
Tyndale  from  the  first.  Once  the  book  was  pub- 
lished, they  knew  well  enough  that  the  bishops  must 
endeavour  to  buy  it  up,  and  that  if  they  bought  only 
a  considerable  number  it  would  help  to  pay  expenses. 
A  good  many  had  already  been  bought  and  burned  at 
Paul's  Cross  in  the  autumn  of  1526,  and  Warham 
believed  that  he  had  secured  the  whole  impression 
in  May  1527.  But  in  the  autumn  of  1528  we  find 
Hermann  Rinck,  a  senator  of  Cologne,  whom  Cochlseus 
had  persuaded  to  suppress  the  printing  begun  there 

Austin  Pakyngton  (brothers,  perhaps)  of  the  office  of  chirographer  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  to  be  held  in  survivorship  (Z.  P.,  iv.  1736).  A  year  or  more 
afterwards  we  find  a  petition  to  the  King  by  John  ap  Howell  of  London, 
mercer,  complaining  that  on  the  8th  October  1526,  during  his  absence  beyond 
sea,  his  house  and  shop  were  broken  into  and  goods  to  the  value  of  £2400 
taken  away  by  a  company  of  whom  Augustine  Packington  was  one.  Pre- 
sumably, however,  this  was  under  some  legal  process. 


236  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

three  years  before,  commissioned  by  Wolsey  to  arrest 
Tyndale  and  Roye,  and  also  to  buy  up  their  books. 
Rinck  received  Wolsey's  letters  at  Frankfort,  whither 
they  had  been  despatched  from  Cologne  with  the 
utmost  haste,  so  that  they  were  transmitted  in  two 
days ;  and  in  reply  he  wrote  that  the  men  had  not 
been  seen  at  Frankfort  Fair  since  Easter,  and  their 
printer,  a  John  Schott  of  Strasburg,  did  not  know 
where  they  had  gone  to.  But  he  had  been  inquiring 
about  their  vile  books  three  weeks  before  receiving 
Wolsey's  letter,  and  found  that  some  had  been  pawned 
to  the  Jews  of  Frankfort  for  ready  money.  He  hoped 
he  had  secured  the  whole  of  these.  There  were  two 
books  also  of  which  copies  were  to  have  been  smuggled 
into  England  and  Scotland  covered  with  paper  in  ten 
packages  tied  up  with  packthread.  But  he  had 
stopped  all  that,  and  he  would  endeavour  to  arrest 
both  Roye  and  Tyndale  and  all  other  mischievous 
Englishmen,  as  he  had  been  in  past  times  an  im- 
portant political  agent  both  of  the  King  and  of  his 
father.  He  had  compelled  John  Schott  to  take  oath 
before  the  authorities  at  Frankfort  as  to  the  numbers 
of  English  books  he  had  printed  for  Roye  and  Tyn- 
dale, who,  he  said,  had  no  money  to  pay  for  them, 
and  he  had  purchased  the  whole  stock  and  had 
them  at  his  house  at  Cologne,  awaiting  Wolsey's 
instructions  what  to  do  with  them.  Thus  it  is  clear 
there  was  a  good  deal  of  buying  and  burning  of  books 
before  the  year  1529,^  though  these,  indeed,  were  not 
New  Testaments. 

In  connection  with  Hall's  anecdote,  however,  it 
may  not  be  amiss  to  set  before  the  reader  what  Sir 
Thomas  More  himself  says  three  years  later  about 
this  George  Constantine  whom  he  interrogated  in 
the  manner  above  reported.     In  the  Preface  to  his 

^  L.  p.,  IV.  4810.  The  whole  text  of  Rinck's  letter  is  given  with  a 
translation  (not  quite  accurate,  however)  in  Arber's  reprint  of  Tyndale's 
New  Testament,  pp.  32-6. 


cH.i       STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        237 

Confutation  of  Tyndale's  Answer,  made  in  1532, 
More  states  that  Constantine  had  been  arrested  for 
heresy  and  escaped.  Before  his  escape  he  "  was 
ready  to  have,  in  word  at  the  least  wise,  abjured 
all  the  whole  doctrine."  It  was  intended  to  show 
him  the  more  favour  *'  in  that  he  seemed  very 
penitent  of  his  misusing  himself  in  falling  to  Tyn- 
dale's heresies  again ;  for  which  he  acknowledged 
himself  worthy  to  be  hanged  that  he  had  so  falsely 
abused  the  King's  gracious  remission  and  pardon 
given  him  before,  and  had  for  all  that  in  the  while 
both  bought  and  sold  of  those  heretical  books  and 
secretly  set  forth  those  heresies.  Whereof  he  showed 
himself  so  repentant  that  he  uttered  and  disclosed 
divers  of  his  companions,  of  whom  there  are  some 
abjured  since  and  some  that  he  wist  well  were 
abjured  before,  namely  Richard  Necton,  which  was 
by  Constantine's  detection  taken  and  committed  to 
Newgate,  where,  except  he  hap  to  die  before  in  prison, 
he  standeth  in  great  peril  to  be,  ere  it  be  long,  for 
his  falling  again  to  Tyndale's  heresies,  burned."  ^ 

More  follows  this  up  with  some  other  instances 
of  the  duplicity  of  Constantine  and  his  allies ;  and 
he  adds  that  Constantine  not  only  disclosed  his  own 
heresies,  but  studied  how  "  those  devilish  books  "  that 
he  and  his  fellows  had  brought  and  shipped  might 
come  to  the  Bishop's  hands  to  be  burned,  and  gave 
the  shipman's  name  "  and  the  marks  of  the  fardels," 
by  which  More  got  them  into  his  hands. ^ 

The  burning  of  the  books  took  place  in  St.  Paul's  The  bum- 
Churchyard  in  May  1530  by  Tunstall's  order,^  though  Tyndlie's 
he  was  no  longer  Bishop  of  London  at  that  time,  having  Testa- 
been  translated  to  Durham  in  March ;  but  his  successor,  ™  ^ 
Stokesley,  was  then  upon  the  Continent  on  a  special 

1  More's  Works,  p.  346.  Necton's  real  Christian  name  was  Robert,  not 
Richard,  and  he  does  not  appeiir  to  have  incurred  the  fate  which  More 
anticipated  for  him.  He  was  one  of  those,  doubtless,  whom  the  influence 
of  Anne  Boleyn  protected, 

2  Ibid.,  p.  347.  '  Hall's  Chronicle,  p.  771. 


238  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

mission  from  the  King.  Tyndale,  however,  does  not 
seem  to  have  applied  the  funds  with  which  the  Bishop 
had  indirectly  supplied  him  to  a  revised  edition  of  his 
New  Testament ;  for  such  an  edition,  apparently,  was 
not  published  till  five  years  later.  It  is  suggested, 
however,  with  something  more  than  plausibility,  by 
Demaus,  the  biographer  of  Tyndale,  that  he  applied 
them  to  biblical  work  of  the  same  character ;  for 
he  had  just  completed  his  translation  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch from  the  Hebrew,  which  issued  from  the 
press  of  Hans  Luft  at  Marburg  (if  we  may  trust  the 
printed  date)  on  the  17th  January  1530.^  And  this 
work  was  illustrated  by  woodcuts  which  had  been 
used  by  Vorstermann  in  the  Dutch  Bible  which  he 
printed  at  Antwerp  in  1528.  They  were  changed 
when  he  reprinted  that  bible  four  years  later ;  so 
that  it  would  appear  the  blocks  were  purchased  from 
him  by  Tyndale  at  Antwerp  in  1529  and  carried  off 
to  Marburg,^  or  to  the  place  where  the  Pentateuch 
was  printed.  This  fact  is  of  some  value  as  con- 
firmatory of  Hall's  statement  that  Tyndale  actually 
was  at  Antwerp  that  year,  which  otherwise,  as  we 
shall  see  by  and  by,  might  possibly  have  been  open 
to  question. 

The  bishops  were  doing  their  utmost  to  suppress 

heretical  literature,  and  the  King,  as  he  had  always 

done,  affected  to  second  their  efforts.     Yet  in  that 

very  month  of  May  1530,  in  which  Tyndale's  books 

were  burned  in   St.  Paul's   Churchyard,  it  seems  to 

The  King    havc   bccomc   notorious   that   the   King  was    really 

heresy^^^^  cncouraguig  their  distribution.     For  thus  writes  again 

under-       Bishop  Nix  to  Archbishop  Warham  on  the  14th  May 

in  that  year  : — 

After  most  humble  recommendation,  I  do  your  Glrace  to 
understand  that  I  am  accumbered  with  such  as  keepeth  and 

^  There  is  no  doubt,  it  should  be  added,  that  in  this  instance  January 
1530  means  of  the  historical  year  beginning  on  the  1st  January.  There  is 
doubt,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  whether  "Marburg"  be  not  a  fictitious  date. 

^  Demaus's  Tyndale,  p.  217. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        239 

readeth  these  erroneous  books  in  English,  and  believe  and 
give  credence  to  the  same,  and  teacheth  others  that  they 
should  so  do.  My  Lord,  I  have  done  that  lieth  in  me  for 
the  suppression  of  such  persons ;  but  it  passeth  my  power, 
or  any  spiritual  man  for  to  do  it.  For  divers  saith  openly 
in  my  diocese  that  the  King's  Grace  would  that  they  should 
have  the  said  erroneous  books,  and  so  maintaineth  themselves 
of  the  King.  Whereupon  I  desired  my  Lord  Abbot  of  Hyde 
to  show  this  to  the  King's  Grace,  beseeching  him  to  send  his 
honorable  letters  under  his  Seal  down  to  whom  he  pleases  in 
my  diocese,  that  they  may  show  and  publish  that  it  is  not 
his  pleasure  that  such  books  should  be  had  or  read,  and 
also  punish  such  as  saith  so.  I  trust  before  this  letter  shall 
come  unto  you  my  lord  Abbot  hath  done  so.  The  said  Abbot 
hath  the  names  of  some  that  cracketh  in  the  King's  name 
that  their  false  opinions  should  go  forth,  and  will  die  in  the 
quarrel  that  their  ungracious  opinions  be  true,  and  trusteth 
by  Michaelmas  day  there  shall  be  more  that  shall  believe 
of  their  opinions  than  they  that  believeth  the  contrary.  If 
I  had  known  that  your  Grace  had  been  at  London,  I  would 
have  commanded  the  said  Abbot  to  have  spoken  with  you. 
But  your  Grace  may  send  for  him  when  you  please,  and 
he  shall  show  you  my  whole  mind  in  this  matter,  and  how 
I  thought  best  for  the  suppression  of  such  as  holdeth  these 
erroneous  opinions ;  for  if  they  continue  any  time,  I  think 
they  shall  undo  us  all. 

The  said  Abbot  departed  from  me  on  Monday  last ;  and 
sith  that  time  I  have  had  much  trouble  and  business  with 
others  in  like  matter ;  and  they  say  that  wheresomever  they 
go,  they  hear  say  that  the  King's  pleasure  is,  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  English  should  go  forth,  and  men  should  have  it  and 
read  it.  And  from  that  opinion  I  can  no  wise  induce  them 
but  \i.e.  unless]  I  had  greater  authority  to  punish  them  than 
I  have.  Wherefore  I  beseech  your  good  Lordship  to  advertise 
the  King's  Grace,  as  I  trust  the  said  Abbot  hath  done  before 
this  letter  shall  come  unto  your  Grace,  that  a  remedy  may 
be  had. 

For  now  it  may  be  done  well  in  my  diocese,  for  the 
gentlemen  and  the  commonality  be  not  greatly  infected, 
but  merchants  and  such  that  hath  their  abiding  not  far 
from  the  sea.  The  said  Abbot  of  Hyde  can  show  you  of 
a  curate,  and  well  learned,  in  my  diocese,  that  exhorted 
his  parishioners  to  believe  contrary  to  the  Catholical  faith. 
There  is  a  college  in  Cambridge  called  Gunwell  Hall,  of 


240  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

the  foundation  of  a  bishop  of  Norwich.  I  hear  of  no  clerk 
that  hath  come  out  lately  of  that  college  but  savoureth  of 
the  frying  pan,  though  he  speak  never  so  holily. 

I  beseech  your  Grace  to  pardon  me  of  my  rude  and 
tedious  writing  to  you.  The  zeal  and  love  I  owe  to 
Almighty  God  cause  me  this  to  do.  And  thus  Almighty 
God  long  preserve  your  Grace  in  good  prosperity  and  health. 
At  Hoxne,  the  14th  day  of  May  1530. 

Your  obedienciary  and  daily  orator, 

Rl.  NOKWICENSIS.^ 

Never  was  the  beginning  of  a  great  change  of  times 
more  distinctly  indicated.  The  King  patronising 
heresy !  For  his  own  security  it  was  the  last  thing 
any  king  had  done  hitherto;  and  Henry  VHL,  the 
Defender  of  the  Faith  against  Luther,  how  could  he 
do  so  ?  It  could  not  be  true ;  and  yet  men  were 
bold  enough  to  say  it  was  so.  If  the  King  could 
encourage  a  religious  literature  distinctly  disapproved 
by  the  Church,  how  could  the  Church  successfully 
maintain  the  war  for  truth  against  falsehood  ?  Bishop 
Nix  must  have  positive  assurance  on  the  subject, 
and  the  Abbot  of  Hyde  (John  Salcot,  a  man  agreeable 
to  the  Court,  who  was  four  years  later  made  Bishop  of 
Bangor  for  his  obsequiousness)  must  learn  the  exact 
truth.  Things  were  very  serious  when  a  whole  college 
at  Cambridge  was  full  of  heresy,  and  there  was  an 
incumbent  in  the  Bishop's  own  diocese — evidently 
Bilney,^  who,  as  we  have  seen,  had  exceptional  favour 
shown  him,  —  a  "  well  learned "  man,  who  openly 
exhorted  his  parishioners  to  believe  things  contrary 
to  the  Catholic  Faith.  Whether  bishops  had  or  had 
not  the  power  to  stop  all  this  depended  mainly  on 
the  support  they  received  from  the  temporal  power. 

And    what    did    the    King   do    about   it  ?      For 

1  MS.  Cott.,  Cleop.  E  v.  366.  The  flyleaf  with  the  address  of  this  letter  is 
lost,  but  there  is  no  doubt  it  was  addressed  to  Warham,  though  in  L.  P.  iv. 
6385  it  has  been  supposed  to  be  addressed  to  the  Duke  of  Norfolk. 

^  Bilney  was  Dean  of  Foston  in  Norwich  diocese,  collated  to  that  benefice 
in  1518.— Blomefield's  Norfolk,  vii.  364. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        241 

an  answer  we  may  again  refer  to  Hall,  who  begins 
his  record  of  the  twenty-second  year  of  the  reign 
(which  dates  from  22nd  April  1530)  as  follows  : — 

In  the  beginning  of  this  two  and  twentieth  year,  the  yet  holds  a 
King,  like  a  politic  and  prudent  prince,  perceived  that  his  ^^^^^f^  *^ 
subjects  and  other  persons  had,  divers  times  within  four  down, 
years  last  past,  brought  into  his  realm  great  number  of 
printed  books  of  the  New  Testament,  translated  into  the 
English  tongue  by  Tyndale,  Joye,  and  others,  which  books 
the  common  people  used  and  daily  read  privily ;  which  the 
clergy  would  not  admit,  for  they  punished  such  persons 
as  had  read,  studied  or  taught  the  same,  with  great 
extremity ;  but,  because  the  multitude  was  so  great,  it 
was  not  in  their  power  to  redress  their  grief.  Wherefore 
they  made  complaint  to  the  Chancellor  [Sir  Thomas  More], 
which  leaned  much  to  the  spiritual  men's  part  in  all  causes ; 
whereupon  he  imprisoned  and  punished  a  great  number ;  so 
that  for  this  cause  a  great  rumor  and  controversy  rose  daily 
amongst  the  people.  Wherefore  the  King,  considering  what 
good  might  come  of  reading  of  the  New  Testament  with 
reverence  and  following  the  same,  and  what  evil  might  come 
of  the  reading  of  the  same  if  it  were  evil  translated,  and  not 
followed ;  came  into  the  Star  Chamber  the  five  and  twentieth 
day  of  May,  and  there  commoned  with  his  Council  and  the 
Prelates  concerning  this  cause ;  and,  after  long  debating,  it 
was  alleged  that  the  translation[s]  of  Tyndale  and  Joye  were 
not  truly  translated,  and  also  that  in  them  were  prologues 
and  prefaces  which  sounded  to  heresy  and  railed  against  the 
Bishops  uncharitably.  Wherefore  all  such  books  were  pro- 
hibited, and  commandment  given  by  the  King  to  the  Bishops 
that  they,  calling  to  them  the  best  learned  men  of  the 
universities,  should  cause  a  new  translation  to  be  made, 
so  that  the  people  should  not  be  ignorant  in  the  law  of 
God.  And  notwithstanding  this  commandment,  the  Bishops 
did  nothing  at  all  to  set  forth  a  new  translation ;  which 
caused  the  people  to  study  Tyndale's  translation ;  by  reason 
whereof  many  things  came  to  light,  as  you  shall  see 
hereafter.^ 

The  last  sentence  of  this  extract  is  entirely  unjust, 
as  we  shall    see    hereafter.     But  the  whole  extract 

1  Hall's  Glironicle,  p.  771. 
VOL.  II  R 


242   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

deserves  careful  attention.  For,  in  the  first  place,  the 
writer  was  a  well-informed  contemporary.  Secondly, 
he  was  a  lawyer  and  very  careful  of  his  statements, 
though  a  sad  special  pleader  in  favour  of  the  King. 
And  thus  we  have  the  advantage  of  viewing  from  the 
other  side  the  very  same  facts  that  are  shown  in 
Bishop  Nix's  letter  last  quoted — the  importation  of 
Tyndale's  books  and  the  impossibility  of  suppressing 
them  on  account  of  their  number,  notwithstanding 
the  willing  aid  given  by  Sir  Thomas  More,  as  Chan- 
cellor, to  the  bishops  in  arresting  and  punishing  those 
guilty  of  the  illicit  traffic.  Not  a  word,  of  course,  is 
told  us  by  Hall  about  the  King's  connivance  at  their 
difi'usion  —  that  would  have  been  showing  up  the 
King's  hypocrisy.  We  are  only  told  of  the  measures 
taken  by  the  King  to  meet  an  acknowledged  evil — 
how  he  conferred  upon  the  matter  with  his  Council 
and  the  prelates,  how  he  graciously  listened  to  the 
complaints  that  the  translations  made  by  Tyndale 
and  by  Joye  (Tyndale's  fellow -labourer,  as  he  was 
at  first,  though  by  this  time  he  had  become  a  trouble- 
some rival,  publishing  unauthorised  revisions), — and 
how  he  (the  King)  had  consequently  prohibited  the 
circulation  of  such  books,  but  had  at  the  same  time, 
with  unquestionable  wisdom  or  cleverness,  laid  upon 
the  bishops  the  duty  of  making  a  new  and  wholesome 
translation,  to  counteract  the  mischief  done  by  such 
works  as  Tyndale's.  Thus  ingeniously  did  the  King 
meet  a  crisis  which  he  had  certainly  done  something 
to  render  more  acute ;  and  the  very  proclamation 
itself — as  thus  reported,  at  least — showed  that  there 
was  some  ground  for  current  rumours,  when  the  King 
virtually  confessed  that  he  wished  the  people  to  have, 
if  not  "  erroneous  books,"  at  least  a  translation  of 
the  New  Testament  in  English.  But  we  shall  get 
a  more  exact  account  of  this  proclamation  presently. 

I  have  already  spoken  of  the  character  of  Tyndale's 
New  Testament.    Yet  the  substantial  benefit  we  have 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        243 

gained  by  a  vernacular  translation  from  the  Greek 
very  naturally  hides  from  our  view,  after  the  lapse  of 
ages,  the  indications  of  a  perverse  and  bitter  spirit 
running  through  the  whole  design.  The  marginal 
glosses  have  long  ago  been  dropped,  and  the  most 
offensive  mistranslations  have  long  ago  been  corrected. 
But  the  spirit  of  the  author  was  visible  in  many  little 
turns  of  expression  which  look  harmless  now.  If  the 
modern  reader,  however,  be  disposed  to  think  the 
censure  passed  upon  Tyndale  and  his  handling  of 
Scripture  altogether  unjustifiable,  it  is  worth  while 
to  consider  in  what  a  reverent  frame  of  mind  he  pre- 
pared for  press  and  annotated  his  English  version  of 
the  Pentateuch — a  work  which  he  had  completed  only 
four  months  before  in  Germany,  and  which  had 
already  come  to  be  known  in  England.  It  had  Tyudaie's 
numerous  marginal  annotations  of  a  biting  and  ^i"«'"°«^s- 
sarcastic  character.  "  Not  a  single  passage  is  over- 
looked," says  Demaus,  "  from  which  any  comment 
could  be  drawn  against  the  doctrines  and  practices  of 
the  Pope  and  clergy."  And  the  following  are  given 
as  illustrations :  "  How  shall  I  curse  whom  God 
curseth  not  ? "  asks  Balaam  in  Tyndale's  version 
(Numb,  xxiii.  8),  and  a  marginal  note  makes  answer, 
"  The  Pope  can  tell  how."  Even  on  the  text  (Genesis 
xxiv.  60),  "  They  blessed  Pebekah,"  is  a  sarcastic 
observation,  "To  bless  a  man's  neighbour  is  to  pray 
for  him  and  to  wish  him  good,  and  not  to  wag  two 
Jlngers  over  him  "  ;  and  with  reference  to  Genesis  ix. 
6  ("Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,"  etc.),  the  bishops 
in  a  somewhat  lengthy  note  are  spoken  of  as  "  the 
Pope's  Cains,"  whom  kings  should  not  allow  to  shed 
blood  without  requiring  their  own  in  return.  So 
Tyndale  in  translating  Scripture  wished  to  hold  up 
bishops  to  opprobrium  as  murderers,  though  he  knew 
well  that  heretics  were  burned  only  by  order  of  the 
civil  power.  He  had  not  proceeded  quite  to  these 
lengths  in  defiling  the  New  Testament  with  partisan 


244  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

glosses,  but  his  general  intent,  even  there,  was  obvious 
enough  to  his  contemporaries. 

Hall's  account  of  the  King's  consultation  in  the 
Star  Chamber  seems  to  be  just  one  day  wrong  in  the 
date.  It  took  place,  not  on  the  25th,  but  on  the 
24th  of  May ;  for  a  long  official  record  of  it  is 
entered  on  Archbishop  Warham's  register,  in  which 
it  is  stated  that  his  Highness  was  "  in  person  in  the 
chapel  called  the  Old  Chapel,  which  sometime  was 
called  St.  Edward's  chamber,  set  on  the  East  side  of 
the  Parliament  chamber  within  his  Grace's  palace  at 
Westminster,  upon  the  24th  day  of  May  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  God  Jesus  Christ  1530,  and  in  the  twenty- 
second  year  of  his  reign,"  where  he  called  notaries  to 
make  authentic  instruments  of  his  decree.^  The 
document  itself  begins  with  an  open  address  to  the 
faithful  in  time  to  come  by  the  Archbishop,  relating 
how  the  King,  as  Defender  of  the  Faith,  in  order  to 
counteract  the  influence  of  pernicious  books,  had 
called  a  Council  of  his  chief  prelates  and  clerks  and 
learned  men  of  each  university,  and  had  taken  their 
judgments  on  such  of  those  books  as  he  had  read  ;  and 
how  this  Council  had  "  found  in  them  many  heresies, 
both  detestable  and  damnable,"  likely  to  corrupt  a 
great  part  of  the  people  if  suflfered  to  remain  in  their 
hands.  Then  followed  a  list  of  heresies  found  in 
each  of  the  books  referred  to,  viz.  in  the  Wicked 
Mammon  and  Tlie  Obedience  of  a  Christian  Man 
(both  books  of  Tyndale),  The  Revelation  of  Anti- 
christ, The  Sum  of  Scripture,  The  Book  of 
Beggars,  and  so  forth.  All  which  errors  are  de- 
nounced with  the  books  containing  the  same,  and  also 
"  the  translation  of  Scripture  corrupted  by  William 
Tyndale,  as  well  in  the  Old  Testament  as  in  the  New." 
Order  After  this  was  entered  a  "  bill  in  English  to  be 

^/elchTrs  published  by  the  preachers,"  how  to  warn  their  flocks 
of  the  decision  that  had  been  come  to,  notifying  that 

1  Wilkins's  Concilia,  iii.  736,  737. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE        245 

it  had  been  unanimous,  although  perfect  freedom  was 
granted  to  every  man  in  the  assembly  "  to  say  as  his 
conscience  and  learning  served  him."  The  preacher 
then  is  to  bid  his  hearers,  if  they  possess  such  books, 
"  detest  them,  abhor  them,  keep  them  not  in  your 
hands,  deliver  them  to  the  superiors,  such  as  call  for 
them  ;  and  if  by  reading  of  them  heretofore  anything 
remains  in  your  breasts  of  that  teaching,  either  forget 
it,  or  by  information  of  the  truth  expel  it  and  purge 
it,  to  the  intent  that  ye,  so  purified  and  cleansed  of 
that  contagious  doctrine  and  pestiferous  traditions, 
may  be  fit  and  apt  to  receive  and  retain  the  true 
doctrine  and  understanding  of  Christ's  laws,  to  the 
comfort  and  edification  of  your  souls.  Thus  I  move 
and  exhort  you  in  God  to  do ;  this  is  your  duty  to 
do ;  this  ye  ought  to  do  ;  and,  being  obstinate  and 
denying  or  refusing  this  to  do,  the  prelates  of  the 
Church,  having  the  cure  and  charge  of  your  souls, 
ought  to  compel  you,  and  your  prince  to  punish  and 
correct  you  not  doing  of  the  same  :  unto  whom,  as 
St.  Paul  saith,  the  sword  is  given  by  God's  ordinance 
for  that  purpose." 

How  far  the  King  was  to  be  relied  on  in  this 
matter  perhaps  the  clergy  did  not  feel  very  well 
assured,  but  they  were  quite  assured  as  to  what  was 
his  duty.  Then  follows  this  passage  which  bears  most 
upon  our  subject : — 

Ye  shall  also  further  understand  that  the  King's  Highness, 
forasmuch  as  it  was  reported  unto  him  that  there  is  engendered 
an  opinion  in  divers  of  his  subjects,  that  it  is  his  duty  to 
cause  the  Scripture  of  God  to  be  translated  into  the  English 
tongue,  to  be  communicate  unto  the  people ;  and  that  the 
prelates  and  also  his  Highness  do  wrong  in  letting  or  denying 
of  the  same ;  his  Highness,  therefore,  willed  every  man  there 
present  in  that  assembly,  freely  and  frankly  to  show  and 
open  unto  him  what  might  be  approved  and  confirmed  by 
Scripture  and  holy  doctors  in  that  behalf,  to  the  intent  that 
his  Highness,  as  he  then  openly  protested,  might  conform 
himself  thereunto,  minding  to  do  his  duty  towards  his  people 


246  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

as  he  would  that  they  should  do  their  duties  towards  him. 
In  which  matter, — after  Scriptures  declared,  holy  doctors  and 
authors  alleged  and  read,  and  all  things  said  [that]  might  be, 
on  both  sides  and  for  both  parties,  spoken,  deduced  and 
brought  forth, — finally  it  appeared  that  the  having  the  whole 
Determina-  Scripture  in  English  is  not  necessary  to  Christian  men,  but 
tion  come  |.j^g^^  without  having  any  such  Scripture,  endeavouring  them- 
transiating  selves  to  do  well,  and  to  apply  their  minds  to  take  and  follow 
the  Bible,  such  lessons  as  the  preacher  teacheth  them,  and  so  learn  by 
his  mouth,  may  as  well  edify  spiritually  in  their  souls,  as  if 
they  had  the  same  Scripture  in  English.  And  like  as  the 
having  of  Scripture  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  and  in  the  common 
people's  hands,  hath  been  by  the  Holy  Fathers  of  the  Church 
heretofore  in  some  times  thought  meet  and  convenient,  so 
at  another  time  it  hath  been  thought  to  holy  Fathers  not 
expedient  to  be  communicate  amongst  them ;  wherein,  for 
as  much  as  the  King's  Highness,  by  the  advice  and  delibera- 
tion of  his  Council  and  the  agreement  of  great  learned  men, 
thinketh  in  his  conscience  that  the  divulging  of  this  Scripture 
at  this  time  in  English  tongue  to  be  committed  to  the  people, 
considering  such  pestilent  books  and  so  evil  opinions  as  be 
now  spread  among  them,  should  rather  be  to  their  further 
confusion  and  destruction  than  the  edification  of  their  souls ; 
and  that  as  holy  doctors  testify,  upon  such  like  considerations, 
the  semblable  hath  been  done  in  times  past ; — it  was  thought 
there  in  that  assembly  to  all  and  singular  in  that  congrega- 
tion, that  the  King's  Highness  and  the  prelates  in  so  doing, 
not  suffering  the  Scripture  to  be  divulged  and  communicate 
in  the  English  tongue  unto  the  people  at  this  time,  doth  well. 
And  I  also  think  and  judge  the  same ;  exhorting  and  moving 
you  that, — in  consideration  his  Highness  did  there  openly 
say  and  protest,  that  he  would  cause  the  New  Testament  to 
be  by  learned  men  faithfully  and  purely  translated  into  the 
English  tongue,  to  the  intent  he  might  have  it  in  his  hands 
ready  to  be  given  to  his  people,  as  he  might  see  their  manners 
and  behaviour  meet,  apt  and  convenient  to  receive  the  same, 
— that  you  will  so  detest  these  pernicious  books,  so  abhor 
these  heresies  and  new  opinions,  so  decline  from  arrogancy 
of  knowledge  and  understanding  of  Scripture  after  your 
phantasies ;  and  show  yourselves  in  commoning  and  reasoning 
so  sober,  quiet,  meek,  temperate,  as,  all  fear  of  misusing  the 
gift  of  Scripture  taken  away,  ye  may  appear  such,  in  your 
prince's  eyes  and  the  eyes  of  your  prelates,  as  they  shall  have 
no  just  cause  to  fear  any  such  danger ;  persuading  unto  your- 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE       247 

selves  in  the  mean  time  without  grudging  or  murmuring,  the 
very  truth,  which  is  this :  that  you  cannot  require  or  demand 
Scripture  to  be  divulged  in  the  English  tongue,  otherwise 
than  upon  the  discretions  of  the  superiors  ;  so  as  whensoever 
they  think  in  their  conscience  it  may  do  you  good,  they  may, 
and  do  well  to,  give  it  unto  you.  And  whensoever  it  shall 
seem  otherwise  unto  them,  they  do  amiss  in  suffering  you  to 
have  it.^ 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  w^hile  Hall's  account  of 
this  proclamation  is  correct  so  far  as  it  goes,  it  lays  a 
little  too  much  stress  on  the  King's  order  to  the 
bishops  to  get  a  new  translation  made.  That  was,  in 
any  case,  a  work  which  would  have  occupied  some 
time,  and  the  bishops,  in  point  of  fact,  did  not  lose 
sight  of  it.  But  Hall  carefully  avoids  informing  the 
reader  of  what  is  so  explicitly  stated  above,  that  the 
bishops  and  learned  men  whom  the  King  consulted 
upon  the  matter,  were  decidedly  of  opinion  that  it  was 
a  mere  question  of  expediency  whether  it  was  advis- 
able that  the  common  people  should  possess  the 
Scriptures  in  the  vulgar  tongue  or  not,  and  that  the 
bishops  themselves  were  the  rightful  judges  of  that 
expediency ;  moreover  that  the  King,  too,  though  he 
wished  a  careful  translation  to  be  made,  quite  agreed 
in  the  judgment  of  those  whom  he  consulted,  that  it 
was  not  at  all  advisable,  at  that  time,  to  place  such  a 
translation  in  the  hands  of  the  public.  He  meant  the 
bishops  to  get  the  translation  made,  but  he  would 
keep  it  in  his  own  hands,  ready  to  be  given  to  the 
people  when  they  seemed  fit  to  make  good  use  of  it. 
We  may  think  what  we  will  of  this  method  of  dealing 
with  an  English  Bible,  but  it  clearly  commended 
itself  to  the  most  pious  and  learned  men  of  the  day, 
and  it  was  the  policy  that  the  King  himself  solemnly 
declared  that  he  would  adopt  at  the  very  time  that 
irrepressible  rumours  declared  that  he  meant  to  sanc- 

^  Wilkins's  Concilia,  iii.  728-36,  from  Warliain's  register  ;  also  iu  Collier's 
Ecclesiastical  History,  iv.  140-49. 


248   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

tion  not  only  the  New  Testament  in  English,  but  all 
sorts  of  heretical  publications  besides.  What  are  we 
to  think  ?  Was  the  King's  solemn  promise  sincere, 
or  did  rumour  interpret  his  intentions  truly  ?  I  am 
afraid  we  must  say  the  latter.  In  accordance,  how- 
ever, with  what  had  been  determined  in  the  Council, 
a  proclamation  was  issued  in  June,  forbidding  the  use, 
or  even  the  keeping,  of  the  heretical  books  denounced, 
and  declaring  that  it  was  not  expedient  at  that  time 
to  have  the  Scriptures  in  English.^ 

Here  it  may  be  desirable  to  interrupt  the  story  of 
Tyndale  and  his  Bible  for  a  while,  in  order  to  follow 
that  of  another  biblical  translator.  There  is  a  great 
difference,  certainly,  between  the  work  of  Tyndale  and 
Origin  of  ^  that  of  Covcrdalc ;  for  Tyndale  translated  the  New 
Bibk.  *  ^  ^  Testament  and  the  Pentateuch  from  the  original 
languages,  while  Coverdale  translated  them  only  from 
the  Vulgate  and  some  modern  translations.  Tyndale's 
work,  moreover,  was  of  his  own  prompting,  while 
Coverdale's  was  done  at  the  solicitation  of  some  one 
else,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  that  some  one 
was  Thomas  Cromwell.  Coverdale  himself  writes 
humbly  enough  about  his  task,  saying  that  it  was  one 
which  he  had  not  sought  for  his  own  part,  and  that 
he  had  made  his  version  from  the  Latin  and  some 
other  translations,  especially  "Dutch,"  by  which -he 
meant  German,  and  no  doubt  Luther's  in  particular. 
The  following  are  his  own  words  upon  the  subject : — 

And  to  help  me  herein  I  have  had  sundry  translations,  not 
only  in  Latin,  but  also  of  the  Dutch  interpreters,  whom, 
because  of  their  singular  gifts  and  special  diligence  in  the 
Bible,  I  have  been  the  more  glad  to  follow  for  the  most  part, 
according  as  I  was  required.  But,  to  say  the  truth  before 
God,  it  was  neither  my  labor  nor  desire  to  have  this  work 
put  in  my  hand ;  nevertheless  it  grieved  me  that  other  nations 
should  be  more  plenteously  provided  for  with  the  Scripture  in 
their  mother  tongue  than  we.    Therefore,  when  I  was  instantly 

1  L.  P.,  IV.  6487  ;  Wilkins's  Concilia,  iii.  740. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE        249 

required,  though  I  could  not  do  so  well  as  I  would,  I  thought 
it  yet  my  duty  to  do  my  best,  and  that  with  a  good  will.^ 

It  would  be  interesting  if  we  could  find  the  date 
at  which  he  was  so  commissioned,  but  it  seems  un- 
certain. The  following  letter,  however,  if  we  could 
assign  it  to  the  precise  year  in  which  it  was  written, 
would  be  a  very  considerable  assistance. 

Miles  Coverdale  to  Thomas  Cromwell 

Most  singular  good  master,  with  due  humility  I  beseech 
unto  your  mastership  all  godly  comfort,  grace,  and  prosperous 
health.  Forsomuch  as  your  goodness  is  so  great  toward  me, 
your  poor  child,  only  through  the  plenteousness  of  your 
favor  and  benevolence,  I  am  the  bolder  of  your  goodness 
in  this  my  rude  style,  if  it  like  your  favor  to  revocate  to 
your  memory  the  godly  communication  which  your  master- 
ship had  with  me,  your  orator,  in  Master  Moore's  house  upon 
Easter  Eve,  among  many  and  divers  fruitful  exhortations, 
specially  of  your  singular  favor ;  and  by  your  most  comfort- 
able words  I  perceive  your  gracious  mind  toward  me.  Where- 
fore, most  honourable  master,  for  the  tender  love  of  God, 
and  for  the  fervent  zeal  that  you  have  to  virtue  and  godly 
study,  cordis  genibus  provolutus,  I  humbly  desire  and 
beseech  your  goodness  of  your  gracious  help.  Now  I  begin 
to  taste  of  Holy  Scriptures;  now,  honor  be  to  God,  I  am 
set  to  the  most  sweet  smell  of  holy  letters,  with  the  godly 
savour  of  holy  and  ancient  doctors,  unto  whose  knowledge 
I  cannot  attain  without  diversity  of  books,  as  is  not  unknown 
to  your  most  excellent  wisdom.  Nothing  in  the  world  I 
desire  but  books,  as  concerning  my  learning.  They  once 
had,  I  do  not  doubt  but  Almighty  God  shall  perform  that 
in  me,  which  He  of  His  most  plentiful  favor  and  grace  hath 
begun.  Moreover,  as  touching  my  behaviour,  your  master- 
ship's mind  once  known,  with  all  lowliness  I  offer  myself, 
not  only  to  be  ordered  in  all  things  as  shall  please  your 
wisdom,  but  also  as  concerning  the  education  and  instruction 
of  other,  alonely  to  ensue  your  prudent  counsel;  nam  quicquid 
est  in  te  concilii,  nihil  non  politicum,  nihil  non  divinum  est. 
Quicquid  enim  ages  nihil  inconsulte  agis ;  nusquam  te  primuni 

^  Coverdale's  Remains,  p.  12  (Prologue  to  the  Bible). 


250  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

philosophum  prcehes.  De  rore  autem  cceli  summam,  more  Jacob, 
surrepuisti  benedictionem.  De  tuo  ipso  torrente  maxime  potare 
exopto,  teque  coram  alloqui  non  mediocriter  cupio.  Vale, 
decus  literarum,  conciliorum,  omnium  denique  probitatum. 
From  the  Augustines,  this  May  day. 

Your  child  and  bedeman  in  Jesu  Christ, 
Frere  Myles  Coverdale. 

Addressed :  Unto  the  Right  Worshipful  and  his  most 
singular  good  master,  Master  Cromwell,  this  be  delivered 
with  due  manner. 

It  is  pretty  clear  that  in  whatever  year  this  letter 
was  written  it  was  just  about  the  time  that  the  writer 
was  beginning  to  consider  the  undertaking  on  which 
he  had  embarked,  and  that  it  was  Cromwell  who 
engaged  him  in  the  task.  As  the  work  was  com- 
pleted in  October  1535,  we  cannot  but  allow  some 
time — a  year  or  two  is  little  enough — for  its  accom- 
plishment ;  and  the  address  of  the  letter  is  further 
evidence  on  that  point,  for  from  April  1534  till 
June  1536  Cromwell  was  commonly  addressed  as 
secretary  to  the  King's  Grace.  Moreover,  he  was  a 
Privy  Councillor  pretty  early  in  the  year  1531,  and 
though  the  title  was  not  invariably  given  him  in 
the  letters  he  received  at  that  period,  it  is  not  likely 
that  it  would  have  been  omitted  by  so  devoted  a 
servant,  as  we  may  really  call  him,  as  this  Friar 
Miles  Coverdale.  Besides,  I  must  add  that  though 
Anderson  in  his  Annals  of  the  English  Bihle  is 
inclined  to  date  the  letter  1531  on  the  ground 
that  "  the  style  proves  that  Cromwell  had  already 
much  in  his  power,"  ^  there  is  rather  a  material  fact 
to  be  considered  in  favour  of  a  still  earlier  date. 
For  in  1528  one  Thomas  Topley,  an  Augustinian 
friar  like  Coverdale  himself,  was  cited  before  Bishop 
Tunstall  for  heresy,  and  confessed  that  his  faith  had 
been  disturbed  by  reading  the  book  called  Wycliffe's 

^  Anderson,   i.    556-7.      This   book    is    still   valuable   for  many  things, 
though  published  so  long  ago  as  1845. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE        251 

Wicket,  though  he  did  not  agree  with  it  "  till,"  he 
says,  "  I  heard  Sir  Miles  Coverdale  preach,  and  then 
my  mind  was  sore  withdrawn  from  the  Blessed  Sacra- 
ment, insomuch  that  I  took  it  then  but  for  the 
remembrance  of  Christ's  body."  "  Furthermore,"  the 
deposition  goes  on,  "he  said  and  confessed  that  in 
the  Lent  last  past,  as  he  was  walking  in  the  field 
at  Bumpstead  with  Sir  Miles  Coverdale,  late  friar  of 
the  same  Order,  going  in  the  habit  of  a  secular  priest, 
who  had  preached  the  Fourth  Sunday  in  Lent  [29  th 
March  1528]  at  Bumpstead,  they  did  commune 
together  of  Erasmus's  works,  and  also  upon  Con- 
fession. This  Sir  Miles  said  and  did  hold,  that  it 
was  sufficient  for  a  man  to  be  contrite  for  his  sins, 
betwixt  God  and  his  conscience,  without  confession 
made  to  a  priest ;  which  opinion  this  respondent 
thought  to  be  true,  and  did  affirm  and  hold  the  same 
at  that  time.  Also  he  saith  that  at  the  said  sermon 
by  the  said  Sir  Miles  Coverdale,  at  Bumpstead,  he 
heard  him  preach  against  worshipping  of  images  in 
the  church,  saying  that  men  in  no  wise  should  honour 
or  worship  them ;  which  likewise  he  thought  to  be 
true,  because  he  had  no  learning  to  defend  it."  ^ 

Thus  it  would  appear  that  Miles  Coverdale  had 
preached  in  March  1528  in  an  Essex  village,  a  sermon 
that  must  have  been  considered  distinctly  heretical 
according  to  conventional  standards,  and  that,  about 
that  time,  assuming  a  secular  priest's  habit,  he  coverdaie 
apostatised  from  his  Order,  and  was  no  longer  con-  f^a^'^'^'^^ 
sidered  as  a  friar.  What  was  to  become  of  such 
a  man  in  the  nature  of  things  ?  Of  course,  he 
would  have  to  flee  the  country  ;  for  England  would 
have  been  no  longer  safe  for  him.  And  that  he 
did  so  there  is  not  only  a  strong  presumption, 
but  something  very  like  positive  evidence,  of  which 
presently.  But  first  as  to  the  strong  presumption, 
which  does  not  rest  entirely  on  his  declared  heresy, 

^  Anderson,  i.  185,  from  the  Episcopal  Register  ;  also  Foxe,  v.  40. 


252   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

for  he  might  have  been  caught  or  have  lain  hid  for  a 
while.  It  has  been  remarked  as  not  a  little  striking 
that  in  all  Sir  Thomas  More's  diatribes  against  heresy, 
in  which  he  seems  to  mention  by  name  every  man 
who  had  troubled  the  peace  of  England  with  heretical 
books,  the  name  of  Coverdale  is  entirely  absent/ 
But  till  More's  dying  day  Coverdale  had  not  issued 
any  heretical  books,  so  far  as  is  known ;  and  even  if 
More  had  heard,  as  he  possibly  might  have  heard, 
that  a  friar,  named  Coverdale,  had  turned  heretic 
and  fled  the  country,  there  was  no  reason  why  he 
should  have  taken  notice  of  him.  There  is,  however, 
another  fact  much  more  remarkable.  Unless  the  letter 
just  quoted  be  an  exception,  not  one  single  letter  of 
Coverdale's,  written  to  his  patron  Cromwell  after 
1527,  has  been  preserved  until  we  come  to  the  year 
1536  —  a  blank  of  eight  whole  years,  covering,  no 
doubt,  the  whole  time  when  the  translator  was 
engaged  on  his  arduous  labours.  And  the  corre- 
spondence of  Cromwell,  preserved  to  this  day,  is  so 
full  and  so  well  kept,  that  we  can  hardly  imagine  that 
very  much  of  it  is  missing. 

Could  the  above  letter,  then,  written  on  May  Day, 
be  as  early  as  the  year  1527?  Well,  we  have  a 
letter  from  Coverdale  to  Cromwell,  written  in  that 
year,  which  it  may  be  as  well  to  examine  before  we 
proceed  further.     It  is  in  these  words  : — 

Right  honorable  Master,  in  my  most  lowly  manner  I 
commend  me  unto  you,  evermore  desiring  to  hear  of  the 
preservation  of  your  prosperity.  So  it  is,  I  was  required  by 
Mr.  George  Lawson  to  deliver  this  writing  to  your  master- 
ship mine  own  self.  Notwithstanding,  such  an  impediment 
hath  chanced  that  I  must  desire  favor  on  your  behalf  for 
my  excusation.  For  Master  Moore's  kinsman  is  not  all 
well  at  ease ;  nam  e  fehribus  lahorat.  Opinandum  est  sane 
fehris  esse  speciem ;  nam  in  alimentis  lunatico  more  solet 
dijlectere.   Sed  jam  compertum  est  pene  exolevisse.    Wherefore 

^  Anderson,  i.  555. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE        253 

I  beseech  you  to  have  me  excused ;  and  if  I  knew  that  my 
coming  to  London  might  stand  with  your  favor,  truly  the 
bird  was  never  gladder  of  day  than  I  would,  be  to  come. 
But,  briefly,  I  am  ready  at  your  commandment,  nam  restat 
tibi  facultas  apud  tuum  Milonem  mandandi  quoR  voles. 

Cceterum  nihil  apud  nos  promulgatum  est  novi,  nisi  quod 
rumor  est  apud  nostrates  (cum  unus  nostratium  magistrorum 
homicidii  sit  accusatus,  alius  criminis  hcereseos  sit  dilatus) 
quod  tertius  jam  magister  sit  furtivi  criminis  deferendus, — 
nempe  Magister  ille  Stookes  junior ;  cujus  rei  subinde  mani- 
festius  te  certiorem  faciemus.  Denique,  prceter  istuc  nullum 
mihi  scribendi  argumentum  relictum  est,  nisi  quod  tu  tuique 
rectissime  valeatis.  Quod  faxit  Christus  Optimus  Maximus, 
cui  sit  honor  et  imperium  in  ceternum.  Amen.  Ex  Canta- 
hrigia,  27  die  mensis  Augusti,  Anno  Domini  27  supra 
sesquimilesimum. 

Tuus  quantus  quantus, 

MiLO   COVERDALUS. 

Addressed :  Unto  the  Right  Worshipful  Master  Cromwell 
this  be  delivered  with  speed. 

In  this  letter,  at  least,  we  have  the  advantage  of 
a  very  exact  and  positive  date,  and  we  note  first 
that  it  was  written  from  Cambridge  (of  course  from 
the  house  of  Austin  friars  there,  of  which  Dr.  Barnes 
was  prior),  the  year  before  the  writer  preached  that 
heretical  sermon  at  Bumpstead,  and  apostatised  (as 
the  act  was  called),  that  is  to  say,  abandoned  his 
Order.  And  we  have  one  earlier  notice  of  Coverdale, 
the  year  before  this  letter  was  written,  which  we 
ought  to  keep  in  mind.  For,  in  1526  he  acted  as 
secretary  to  his  prior,  Dr.  Barnes,  when  examined  on 
a  charge  of  heresy.  It  is  well  known  that  there 
was  at  this  time  considerable  sympathy  with  Luther 
among  scholars  at  Cambridge,  and  among  the  Austin 
friars  (Luther's  own  Order)  there  were  several  who 
were  so  affected.  But  what  we  have  to  note  at 
present  is  that  we  have  some  sure  record  of  Coverdale 
in  three  successive  years.  In  1526  he  assists  his 
prior,  Dr.  Barnes,  when  called  up  before  Wolsey  and 


2  54  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

other  bishops.  In  1527  he  writes  the  letter  just 
quoted,  and  in  1528  he  preaches  a  heretical  sermon 
in  Essex  and  abandons  his  Order.  Now  observe  that 
in  the  May-day  letter  he  is  still  a  friar,  and  actually 
calls  himself  so ;  and  that  the  tone  and  address  of 
that  letter  are  very  similar  to  those  of  the  letter  last 
quoted.  Further,  although  it  is  a  minor  point  for 
our  purpose,  there  is  a  certain  Mr.  Moore  mentioned 
in  both  letters,  though  it  is  his  kinsman,  not  himself, 
that  is  spoken  of  in  this  latter  one.  I  must  mention, 
however,  by  the  way,  that  it  is  quite  a  mistake  to 
suppose,  as  some  writers  have  done,  that  the  man 
so  named  is  Sir  Thomas  More  ;  ^  for  the  idea  that 
Thomas  Cromwell  and  Coverdale  once  met  in  Sir 
Thomas  More's  house,  and  had  what  they  called 
"godly  communication"  there,  is  absolutely  incredible. 
For  what  those  of  Coverdale's  school  called  "  godly 
communication  "  would  never  have  been  tolerated  by 
Sir  Thomas. 

It  seems,  therefore,  as  if  1527  were  the  latest 
possible  date  for  the  May-day  letter,  though  it  has 
unfortunately  been  arranged  with  State  papers  of  a 
much  later  year.  To  this,  however,  a  very  plausible 
objection  might  be  raised ;  and  if  it  were  not  for  the 
fact  that  Coverdale  had  unfrocked  himself  in  1528,  we 
should  have  been  disposed  to  agree  with  Anderson, 
who  places  the  May-day  letter  in  1531,  as  the  earliest 
year  in  which  Cromwell  seemed  to  have  the  requisite 
authority  to  set  a  man  on  such  work  with  a  prospect 
of  his  labour  being  suitably  recognised.  But  though 
Cromwell  was  not  a  Privy  Councillor  in  1527,  as  he 
was  four  years  later,  he  was  in  the  way  of  possessing 

^  Tlie  name  in  both  these  letters  is  given  in  the  possessive  case — in  the  May- 
day letter  as  "Moorys"  (in  the  original  spelling),  in  the  August  letter  as 
"  Moores."  The  double  o  can  hardly  be  called  important  evidence  that  the 
name  was  not  More,  but  it  is  well  to  note  the  exact  form  here  for  the  sake  of 
accuracy.  The  apostrophe  used  in  later  times  for  a  possessive  case  is  the 
representative  of  a  vowel  which  was  formerly  written.  If  the  o  had  not  been 
double,  "Morys"  might  have  stood  pretty  well  in  the  spelling  of  the  times, 
either  for  "More's"  or  "  Morris's." 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        255 

considerable  influence  otherwise,  as  a  well-to-do  man 
and  a  devoted  servant  of  the  great  Cardinal.  Two 
and  a  half  years  later,  indeed,  his  master's  fall 
would  have  involved  him  in  utter  ruin,  but  that  he 
managed  to  push  his  way  into  the  Court  and  win 
the  favour  of  the  King  himself.  But  in  1527  he  was 
a  wealthy  man  of  business,  of  whose  transactions  we 
have  a  number  of  evidences  in  the  State  papers,  and 
of  whose  worldly  goods  we  have  an  interesting  cata- 
logue drawn  up  in  June  of  that  very  year.^  Already 
he  possessed  a  sumptuous  house  opposite  the  gate  of 
the  Austin  friars  in  London — indeed,  we  find  him 
there  as  early  as  March  1524  ;  ^  he  was  very  frequently 
there  later  in  Wolsey's  time ;  ^  and  it  was  his  prin- 
cipal residence  afterwards  when  he  was  Henry  VIH.'s 
sole  minister.  He  had  been  specially  useful  to  Wolsey 
in  suppressing  the  small  monasteries,  whose  endow- 
ments the  Cardinal  was  authorised  to  use  in  the 
foundation  of  his  two  colleges  ;  he  was  called  one 
of  my  Lord  Cardinal's  Council ;  *  and  being  a  man 
of  decided  literary  taste,  with  plenty  of  wealth  at 
command,  why  should  he  not  have  engaged,  even 
on  his  own  responsibility,  a  promising  scholar  among 
those  Austin  friars,  who,  though  their  home  might 
not  be  in  the  London  house  adjoining  his  own  resi- 
dence, no  doubt  frequently  visited  London  and  were 
lodged  there  during  the  times  of  their  sojourn  ? 

Again,  might  not  his  influence  with  Wolsey  have 
appeared  a  considerable  inducement  to  an  assiduous 
scholar  to  rely  on  Cromwell's  patronage  in  attempting 
an  English  version  of  the  Bible  ?  Tyndale's  version, 
indeed,  was  already  abroad,  and  was  denounced  by 
the  clergy ;  but  that  was  because  it  was  considered 
corrupt  and  scandalous.  There  would  be  no  real 
objection  if  such  a  work  could  get  episcopal  sanction, 

1  L.  P.,  IV.  3197.  "^  L.  P.,   IV.  166. 

■•  L.  P.,  IV.  3675,  3742,  4433,  4837,  4843,  4906,  5034,  5069,  5268,  5285,  etc, 

*  L.  P.,   IV.  5492. 


256   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

to  an  English  version  made  with  care  from  the 
Vulgate,  even  if  the  translator  collated  it  with 
modern  versions  in  other  languages.  Such  a  work 
might  be  valued  by  the  learned  in  the  Cardinal's 
splendid  college  at  Oxford,  and  so  long  as  the  trans- 
lator was  not  one  who  was  visibly  at  war  with  the 
Church,  it  would  not  matter  much,  to  Wolsey  at 
least,  to  what  particular  theological  school  he  might 
attach  himself.  On  this  subject  I  may  quote  the 
words  of  the  late  Professor  Brewer  : — 

Before  the  year  1528  he  (Wolsey)  had  been  indifferent,  in 
a  much  greater  degree  than  More,  to  the  advance  of  Lutheran 
opinions.  His  selection  of  scholars  and  lecturers  for  his  new 
colleges  at  Oxford  and  Ipswich  had  been  chiefly  made  from 
those  who  were  infected  with  the  New  Learning,  as  it  was 
called ;  at  all  events  from  the  rising  young  men  of  ability  in 
both  universities,  whose  Lutheran  tendencies  were  scarcely 
considered  by  him  as  any  disqualification.  He  was  much 
less  concerned  than  any  other  statesman  or  prelate  of  the 
time  to  suppress  diversities  of  religious  opinion  by  the  secular 
arm,  rightly  judging  that  the  most  effectual  way  of  meeting 
the  evil  would  be  the  diffusion  of  education  ;  and  that  societies 
of  scholars,  supplied  with  ample  endowments  and  means  of 
study,  as  in  his  college  at  Christ  Church,  would  prove  a  more 
effectual  support  of  the  faith  than  violent  repression  or 
monastic  institutions,  which  had  now  fallen  far  behind  the 
necessities  of  the  age.^ 

But  with  the  alarm  created  by  the  sale  of  Tyndale's 
New  Testament  and  Garret's  escape  from  Oxford  in 
1528,  Wolsey  himself  felt  compelled  to  be  more 
rigorous  in  his  attitude  towards  heresy.  At  the  same 
time  men  like  Coverdale,  if  they  persevered  in  their 
unpopular  theology,  had  to  declare  themselves  and  fly 
if  they  could  from  impending  fate.  And  so,  as  I  have 
coverdaie's  Said,  it  would  secm  that  Coverdale  fled  abroad,  and 
the  next  thing  we  hear  about  him  definitely  is  that 
he,  and  Tyndale   also,  were    at   Hamburg   together 

^  Reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  ii.  267  ;  from  Introduction  to  L.  P.,  iv.  p.  ccclxvi. 


exile 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE        257 

for   a   time   in    1529.      So    Foxe   tells   us  in   these 
words  : — 

At  what  time  Tyndale  had  translated  the  fifth  book  of 
Moses  called  Deuteronomy,  minding  to  print  the  same  at 
Hamburg,  he  sailed  thitherward  ;  where  by  the  way  upon  the 
coast  of  Holland  he  suffered  shipwreck,  by  which  he  lost  all 
his  books,  writings,  and  copies,  and  so  was  compelled  to 
begin  all  again  anew,  to  his  hindrance  and  doubling  of  his 
labors.  Thus,  having  lost  by  that  ship  both  money,  his 
copies,  and  his  time,  he  came  in  another  ship  to  Hamburg, 
where,  at  his  appointment.  Master  Coverdale  tarried  for  him 
and  helped  him  in  the  translating  of  the  whole  five  books  of 
Moses,  from  Easter  to  December,  in  the  house  of  a  worshipful 
widow.  Mistress  Margaret  Van  Emmerson,  a.d.  1529, — a  great 
sweating  sickness  being  at  the  same  time  in  the  town.  So, 
having  despatched  his  business  at  Hamburg,  he  returned 
afterwards  to  Antwerp  again.^ 

It  is  true  that  this  story  in  all  its  details  is  difficult 
to  reconcile  with  accepted  facts ;  so  that  while  some 
investigators  declare  it  "  fully  charged  with  inaccu- 
racy," others  have  gone  the  length  of  treating  it  as 
an  absolute  fiction.  Of  course,  if  it  is  altogether  true, 
the  story  of  Packington's  negotiation  with  Tyndale 
at  Antwerp  must  be  given  up.  Again,  the  idea  of 
Coverdale  assisting  Tyndale  in  his  translation,  unless 
it  were  as  a  mere  amanuensis,  is  scarcely  plausible,  as 
it  is  very  questionable  whether  Coverdale  knew  any- 
thing of  Hebrew.  And  further,  the  intention  to  print 
the  Pentateuch  at  Hamburg  is  not  likely,  for  there  is 
some  doubt  whether  Hamburg  had  a  press  at  this 
time,  although  there  is  notice  of  one  solitary  work 
printed  there  as  early  as  1491.  On  the  other  hand, 
evidence  has  been  found  in  other  quarters  that  the 
sweating  sickness  was  really  prevalent  in  Hamburg  in 
1529,  and  that  the  widow  of  a  senator  named  Van 
Emmerson  was  then  resident  in  the  town."  Moreover, 
the  printing  of  Tyndale's  Pentateuch  was  completed 

1  Foxe,  V.  120.  ^  Demaus's  Tyndale,  pp.  220-21. 

VOL.   U  S 


258   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

on  the  17tli  January  1530,  avowedly  from  the  press 
of  Hans  Luft  at  Marburg. 

"  If  theory  may  be  admitted  on  the  question," 
says  Demaus,  "  it  seems  allowable  to  suppose  that 
Foxe  was  mistaken  as  to  the  duration  of  Tyndale's 
visit  to  Hamburg.  He  may  have  returned  from  that 
city  to  Antwerp  about  the  end  of  August,  in  time  to 
allow  of  the  interview  with  Packington  ;  or  the  inter- 
view may  have  taken  place  in  that  immediate  return 
to  Antwerp  which  seems  to  have  followed  his  ship- 
wreck." Some  such  conjecture  seems  fairly  admissible ; 
and  one  more,  perhaps,  might  clear  up  the  whole 
difficulty.  In  reporting  some  information  that  he  had 
received,  Foxe  might  very  well  have  mixed  up 
the  names  of  two  places,  Hamburg  and  Marburg, 
which  were  both  in  the  story.  Tyndale  might  have 
gone  to  Hamburg  meaning  to  print  at  Marburg ;  and 
Coverdale,  who  does  not  seem  to  have  looked  on  the 
enterprise  of  other  translators  as  any  bar  to  his  own 
project,^  might  have  assisted,  even  in  his  absence,  in 
transcribing  his  work  (might  not  some  of  his  manu- 
scripts have  been  recovered  after  his  shipwreck 
damaged  by  sea-water  ?),  and  in  arranging  for  its  con- 
veyance when  printed  from  Hamburg  into  England. 

Thus  the  story  in  Foxe  may,  I  think,  be  toler- 
ably accounted  for  without  the  suggestion  of  any 
unnatural  mistakes.  But  conclusive  evidences  have 
recently  been  brought  to  show  that  the  name  of 
Marburg  or  "  Marlborough  in  the  land  of  Hesse," 
which  appears  in  the  date  of  this  and  other  English 
publications  professedly  printed  there  by  Hans  Luft, 

^  Coverdale  seems  to  have  had  the  most  generous  appreciation  of  Tyndale's 
work,  regarding  his  own  Bible  as  a  mere  stopgap  till  Tyndale  should  have 
completed  his.  In  his  "Prologue"  addressed  to  the  reader  he  writes: 
"Though  Scripture  be  not  worthily  ministered  unto  thee  in  this  translation 
by  reason  of  my  rudeness,  yet  if  thou  be  fervent  in  thy  prayer,  God  shall  not 
only  send  it  thee  in  a  better  shape  by  the  ministration  of  other  that  began 
it  afore,  but  shall  also  move  the  hearts  of  them  which  as  yet  meddled  not 
withal  to  take  it  in  hand,  and  to  bestow  the  gift  of  their  understanding 
thereon,  as  well  in  our  language  as  other  famous  interpreters  do  in  other 
languages."— Coverdale 's  Scmains,  p.  20  (Parker  Soc). 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        259 

was  a  deliberate  fiction  to  mislead  emissaries  from 
England  seeking  for  the  sources  of  contraband  litera- 
ture. No  doubt  Marburg  in  the  land  of  Hesse  was  a 
place  where  English  heretics  or  reformers  would  be 
tolerably  safe  under  the  protection  of  the  Landgrave 
Philip.  But  Hans  Luft  never  had  a  printing  press 
there,  and  it  rather  seems  as  if  he  put  his  press  at 
Wittenberg  at  the  service  of  Tyndale,  who  would 
have  easy  opportunities  of  shipping  the  printed 
sheets,  or  even  volumes,  down  the  Elbe  to  Hamburg 
for  exportation  to  England.^ 

At  this  time,  therefore,  the  evidences  seem  to  show 
that  both  Tyndale  and  Coverdale  remained  abroad, 
the  one  as  a  heretic  and  the  other  as  a  runaway  friar, 
neither  of  whom  would  have  been  safe  in  England." 
What  was  Coverdale,  the  quondam  friar,  about  during 
the  next  five  years  and  a  half?  The  answer  is  clear. 
He  was  engaged  in  translating  the  Bible  and  getting 
it  printed  someivhere.  The  locality,  however,  has 
been  a  matter  of  speculation.  He  had  the  advantage 
of  Tyndale  in  one  respect,  but  in  one  respect  only  : 
he  was  allowed  to  complete,  apparently  undisturbed, 
a  translation  of  the  whole  Scriptures.  This  must 
have  been  the  work  of  years,  and  could  only  have 
been  done  abroad.  He  was  lying  hid,  and  nobody  where  was 
knew  what  he  was  about  all  the  while.  He  was  ^^  ^  " 
forgotten  in  England,  and  he  was  not  even  corre- 
sponding with  Cromwell,  so  far  as  we  know.  In 
fact,  if  he  wrote  to  him  at  all  during  this  period,  his 
letters,  one  would  think,  must  have  been  systemati- 
cally burned — a  thing  which  is  by  no  means  incon- 
ceivable, as  Cromwell  could  not  have  wished,   after 

^  See  Mombert's  English  Versions  of  the  Bible,  ]ip.  108-15,  where  the 
evidences  are  fully  given.  They  are  also  repeated  in  the  same  writer's 
"  Biogra])hical  Notice  of  Tyndale"  i>refixed  to  his  edition  of  Tyndale's 
Pentateuch  (1884). 

'•^  It  seems  that  one  "  dominus  Coverdale"  took  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of 
Laws  at  Cambridge  during  the  year  1530  or  1531  (Grace  Book  B,  part  ii.  164, 
Luard  Memorial  Series).  But  though  the  name  is  almost  unique,  this  could 
hardlv  be  Miles  Coverdale. 


26o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

the  year  1528,  to  be  found  in  correspondence  with  a 
heretical  friar  who  had  fled  abroad.  But  as  Coverdale 
himself  must  have  fully  appreciated  that  fact,  he  most 
probably  did  not  write  to  his  former  patron  at  all  till 
times  were  considerably  changed.  That  he  ventured 
while  abroad  on  the  task  of  translating  the  whole 
Bible  into  English,  and  that  he  managed  to  get  it 
printed  abroad  by  October  1535,  are  matters  which 
are  past  dispute  ;  but  it  could  not  very  well  have  been 
under  the  encouragement  of  his  first  patron.  How 
he  did  it  we  shall  inquire  presently. 

Meanwhile  let  us  consider  what  was  going  on 
in  England  while  he  was  patiently  and  secretly  pur- 
suing this  great  labour.  It  was  in  1530  that 
Tyndale's  books  generally  were  burned  at  St.  Paul's, 
and  that  the  King,  having  consulted  his  clergy,  gave 
it  to  be  understood  that  a  new  translation  of  Scrip- 
ture was  not  then  considered  desirable,  though  it 
might  be  expedient  later  when  there  was  a  less  violent 
spirit  of  Lollardy  among  the  people.  Hall's  state- 
ment that  the  King  at  that  time  commanded  the 
bishops  to  get  a  new  translation  made  by  learned  men 
of  the  universities  is  not  strictly  accurate ;  for  all 
that  Henry  intimated  then  was  that  he  would  have 
a  careful  translation  made  of  the  New  Testament, 
to  be  published  at  a  more  propitious  time.  He  did 
not  even  promise  that  he  would  at  once  call  upon 
the  bishops  to  prepare  one  ;  and  to  all  appearance 
he  did  not.  For  four  years  later,  in  December 
1534,  the  bishops  themselves,  together  with  the 
abbots  and  priors  in  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury, 
Proposal  to  petitioned  the  King  to  allow  a  new  translation  to  be 
authorise     j^^dc  and  delivered  to  the  people.      Their   feeling, 

an  English    .     .,       ,  .        -,  xr      r  •       .    i  j.-       i 

translation,  indeed,  remained  as  strong  as  ever  against  heretical 
books,  especially  in  English,  whether  printed  in 
England  or  beyond  the  sea,  and  they  desired  the 
King  at  the  same  time  to  command  every  one  to 
deliver  up  such  things  under  a  penalty.     They  hoped 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        261 

also  that  lie  would  forbid,  under  a  penalty,  quarrel- 
some disputations  by  laymen  on  articles  of  the 
Catholic  Faith  or  on  Holy  Scripture/  But  the  fact 
that  they  sought  the  King's  leave  to  have  a  new 
translation  made  is  surely  sufficient  proof  that  the 
King  had  not  commanded  them  to  make  one. 

No  doubt,  just  as  the  King  could  get  his  faithful 
Commons  to  petition  him  to  do  anything  he  particu- 
larly wished  to  do,  it  may  be  urged  that  even  the 
bishops  in  1534  were  subjected  to  some  pressure, 
as  indeed  they  were,  far  more  than  they  had  ever 
been  till  a  few  years  before.  But  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe  that  in  petitioning  the  King  for  leave  to 
get  a  translation  made  of  the  Bible  they  were  acting 
at  his  instigation,  for  the  appearances  are  quite  other- 
wise. The  considerations  which  would  naturally 
weigh  with  the  bishops  were  evidently  these.  Not- 
withstanding all  their  self-sacrifice  they  had  found 
that  the  art  of  printing,  the  industry  of  Tyndale,  and 
the  enterprise  of  merchants  in  importing  forbidden 
literature  had  made  it  really  impossible  to  stop  the 
circulation  of  translations  which  they  considered 
objectionable,  without  setting  forth  a  better.  The 
heretics,  moreover,  had  been  emboldened  to  keep  up, 
even  from  the  first,  an  agitation  in  favour  of  an 
English  Bible — no  doubt  that  they  might  be  able  to 
sell  more  freely  Tyndale's  Testament  and  Pentateuch  ; 
and  only  half  a  year  after  the  Council  at  Westminster 
and  the  proclamation  against  heretical  books,  when  it 
was  declared  inexpedient  to  have  the  Scriptures  in 
English,  we  find  a  nameless  writer  (who  has  been 
erroneously  identified  with  Latimer)  addressing  a 
long  letter  to  the  King  to  destroy  the  efi'ect  of  that 
proclamation,  and  urge  him  to  let  the  Scriptures  in 
English  have  the  freest  possible  circulation.  This 
letter,  which  is  distinctly  dated  at  the  end  of  De- 
cember 1530,  begins  with  a  long  argument  to  show 

^  Wilkins,  iii.  776. 


262   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

that  the  greed  and  ambition  of  the  clergy  prove  them 
to  be  no  true  followers  of  Christ,  and  that  rather 
than  have  their  wealth  diminished  "  they  will  set 
debate  between  king  and  king,  realm  and  realm, 
yea  between  the  King  and  his  subjects,  and  cause 
rebellion  against  the  temporal  power."  Persecution, 
on  the  other  hand,  was  what  Christ  promised  to  his 
followers,  and  where  the  Word  of  God  was  truly 
preached  there  was  always  persecution.  The  pre- 
tences on  which  the  clergy  wished  the  reading  of 
Scripture  in  English  forbidden  were  merely  selfish. 

"  But  as  concerning  this  matter,"  the  writer  goes 
on,  "  other  men  have  showed  your  Grace  their  minds 
how  necessary  it  is  to  have  the  Scripture  in  English. 
The  King    The  which  thing  also  your  Grace  hath  promised  by 
doTo  at  ^°  your  last  proclamation  ;    the  which  promise  I  pray 
once.  God  that  your  gracious  Highness  may  shortly  per- 

form even  to-day,  before  to-morrow.  Nor  let  the 
wickedness  of  these  worldly  men  detain  you  from 
your  godly  purpose  and  promise.  .  .  . 

"  But  perad venture  they  will  lay  this  against  me, 
and  say  that  experience  doth  show  how  that  such 
men  as  call  themselves  followers  of  the  Gospel  regard 
not  your  Grace's  commandment,  neither  set  by  your 
proclamation,  and  that  was  well  proved  by  those 
persons  which  of  late  were  punished  in  London  for 
keeping  such  books  as  your  Grace  had  prohibited  by 
proclamation  ;  and  so,  like  as  they  regarded  not  this, 
so  they  will  not  regard  or  esteem  other  your  Grace's 
laws,  statutes  or  ordinances.  But  this  is  but  a  crafty 
persuasion  ;  for  your  Grace  knoweth  that  there  is  no 
man  living,  specially  that  loveth  worldly  promotion, 
that  is  so  foolish  to  set  forth,  promote,  or  enhance  his 
enemy,  whereby  he  should  be  let  of  his  worldly 
pleasures  and  fleshly  desires  ;  but  rather  he  will  seek 
all  the  ways  possible  that  he  can,  utterly  to  confound, 
destroy,  and  put  him  out  of  the  way.  And  so,  as 
concerning  your  last  proclamation,  prohibiting  such 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        263 

books,  the  very  true  cause  of  it  and  chief  counsellors 
(as  men  say,  and  of  likelihood  it  should  be)  were 
they  whose  evil  living  and  cloaked  hypocrisy  these 
books  uttered  and  disclosed.  And  howbeit  that  there 
were  three  or  four  that  would  have  had  the  Scripture 
to  go  forth  in  English,  yet  it  happened  there,  as  it  is 
evermore  seen,  that  the  most  part  overcometh  the 
better.  And  so  it  might  be  that  these  men  did  not 
take  this  proclamation  as  yours,  but  as  theirs  set 
forth  in  your  name,  as  they  have  done  many  times 
more,  which  hath  put  this  your  realm  in  great  hind- 
rance and  trouble  and  brought  it  in  great  penury, 
and  more  would  have  done  if  God  had  not  merci- 
fully provided  to  bring  your  Grace  to  knowledge  of 
the  falsehood  and  privy  treason  which  their  head  and 
captain  was  about."  ^ 

It  was  decidedly  prudent  in  the  writer  of  this 
letter  not  to  put  his  name  to  it,  but  it  was  very 
rash  on  the  part  of  Foxe,  who  first  printed  it, 
to  attribute  it  to  Latimer.  Latimer  was  not  the 
man  thus  to  fly  in  the  face  of  a  royal  proclamation 
to  the  passing  of  which  he  had  himself  been  acces- 
sary.^ Indeed,  just  before  that  proclamation  he  had 
been  selected  by  the  Vice-Chancellor  of  Cambridge 
as  one  of  the  twelve  divines  who  were  to  meet  an 
equal  number  of  divines  from  Oxford  to  examine 
the  mischievous  English  books  commonly  read 
among  the  people ;  ^  and  if  before  the  end  of  that 
year  he  had  changed  his  tune  so  completely,  it 
would  undoubtedly  have  been  made  an  additional 
article  to  those  preferred  against  him  for  heresy  in 
1531.  No,  this  letter  to  the  King,  which  vilifies  the 
clergy  so  much,  may,  indeed,  have  been  written  by 
a  clergyman  ;  but  its  object  was  to  encourage  pre- 
judice against  the  clergy  as  a  body,  and  to  impute 

^  The  whole  letter  may  be  read,  reprinted  from  Foxe,  in  Latimer's  Remains, 
pp.  297-309.     See  Foxe,  vii.  506-11. 

2  L.  P.,  IV.  6402.  "■  L.  P.,  IV.  6367. 


264  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

to  them  interested  motives  in  doing  what  was 
generally  regarded  as  their  duty.  The  last  sentence, 
moreover,  is  an  ignoble  thrust  at  the  fallen  Car- 
dinal Wolsey,  dated  the  very  day  after  his  death. 
And  the  writer  not  only  suggests  that  the  clergy  as 
a  body  are  dangerous  to  the  peace  of  kingdoms,  but 
even  insinuates  that  the  men  punished  for  disobeying 
the  King's  proclamation  were  more  loyal  than  those 
who  procured  it ;  for  he  presumes  that  the  proclama- 
tion had  not  really  the  King's  approval,  as  it  professed 
to  have,  and  that  the  King  had  been  misdirected  by 
others  to  give  his  assent  to  it. 

Now,  all  this  was  a  bold  thing  to  insinuate  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  if  it  had  not  been  the 
fact,  as  we  have  seen  already,  that  the  King  was  by 
no  means  unwilling,  for  purposes  of  his  own  at  this 
time,  to  encourage  complaints  against  the  clergy,  and 
even  to  have  his  own  past  policy  in  defence  of  their 
order  discredited.  If  the  writer  was  not  Tyndale 
himself,  who  was  abroad  beyond  reach  of  the  English 
bishops,  he  was  probably  an  intelligent  layman  in 
England  who  had  a  tolerable  notion  how  the  wind 
blew.^  And  it  was  quite  agreeable  to  the  King's 
secret  purpose  that  some  irresponsible  persons  should 
clamour  for  an  English  Bible  just  to  give  the  clergy 
trouble.  So  whether  the  author  were  Tyndale  or 
Cromwell,  or  some  one  else,  there  is  no  difficulty  in 
understanding  how  such  a  letter  was  actually 
addressed  to  the  King  himself  in  1530,  and  how  a 
copy  of  it  exists  among  the  State  Papers  at  this  day.^ 

^  I  hesitate  to  suggest  tliat  it  was  Cromwell,  for  the  case  is  by  no  means 
clear,  and  the  reflection  on  his  dead  master,  Wolsey,  would  be  extremely 
discreditable  to  him.  But  Cromwell,  though  not  called  as  yet  to  the  King's 
Council,  had  already  gained  the  King's  ear,  and,  if  we  are  to  believe  Pole, 
had  already  suggested  to  him  Royal  Supremacy  over  the  Church,  for  which 
this  reviling  of  the  clergy  and  encouragement  of  heresy  was  the  actual 
preparation. 

■■^  This  copy  was,  unfortunately,  overlooked  in  L.  P.,  iv.  ;  and  Professor 
Brewer,  who  knew  the  document  only  as  printed  in  Foxe,  suspected  the  date 
to  be  erroneous,  which  it  must  have  been  if  Latimer  had  been  the  author. 
But  the  copy  in  tlie  Record  Office  is  dated  as  in  Foxe. 


cH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        265 

But  the  clergy  showed  no  intention  to  yield  to 
such  influences,  and  it  does  not  appear  that  even  the 
Kinor  had  declared  himself  more  in  favour  of  having 
the  Scriptures  in  English  in  1534  than  in  1530. 
Much  else  had  taken  place  in  those  four  years,  and 
in  no  years  certainly  was  the  lesson  more  severely 
brought  home  to  the  clergy  that  they  lay  helpless 
under  the  heel  of  a  ruthless  despot  who  was  resolved 
to  turn  ecclesiastical  authority  to  his  own  purposes. 
I  need  not  again  remind  the  reader  of  the  prcemunire, 
the  extortionate  contribution,  the  acknowledgment  of 
a  qualified  Supremacy  (now  to  be  treated  as  un- 
qualified by  Parliament),  and  the  famous  "  Submis- 
sion of  the  Clergy."  These  things,  except  the  Statute 
of  Supremacy,  had  cleared  the  way  for  the  marriage 
with  Anne  Boleyn  in  1533,  and  for  the  King's 
defiance  of  that  papal  excommunication  which  was 
sure  to  follow.  And  now,  in  the  spring  of  1534, 
the  Lower  House  of  Convocation  had  been  got  to 
vote,  by  a  majority  of  thirty -four  to  four,  and  one 
vote  doubtful,  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had  not  a 
higher  authority  than  any  other  foreign  bishop  ;  ^  after 
which  Convocation  was  prorogued  to  November.  In 
that  and  the  following  month,  however,  the  divines 
were  much  occupied  with  the  question  how  to  check 
the  circulation  of  those  mischievous  English  books 
which  found  so  much  favour  at  Court.  A  number  of 
them  were  handed  in  for  examination,  including  one 
attributed  to  Tyndale — probably  the  work  of  that 
"  nameless  heretic  "  whom  More  had  already  answered, 
on  "  the  Supper  of  the  Lord."    On  the  19th  December 

^  The  question  was  astutely  worded  to  answer  the  King's  purpose  : — 
"  Whether  the  Roman  Pontiff  had  a  greater  jurisdiction  conferred  upon  him 
by  God  in  Holy  Writ  than  any  other  foreign  bishop."  This  way  of  putting 
it  virtually  forbade  any  one  to  say  "Aye  "  who  did  not  maintain  that  papal 
authority  was  founded  on  the  text  Ta  es  Pctrus.  Those  who  regarded  it  as 
of  merely  ecclesiastical  origin,  however  highly  they  valued  it,  were  bound  to 
vote  for  the  negative.  That  only  thirty-nine  of  the  clergy  gave  any  vote  at 
all,  either  for,  against,  or  doubtful,  is  really  pretty  strong  evidence  how 
much  they  disliked  the  question  being  raised. 


266  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

a  writ  was  received  in  Convocation  for  its  prorogation 
to  the  4tli  November  next  year.  But  before  reading 
it  the  Prolocutor  communicated  to  the  Archbishop 
and  the  bishops  in  the  Upper  House  the  censures 
of  the  Lower  House  on  the  books  submitted  to 
them.  Then  it  was  that  the  two  resolutions  were 
taken  which  have  been  already  referred  to.  The 
bishops,  abbots,  and  priors  of  the  Upper  House 
agreed  that  the  Archbishop  (Cranmer)  should 
petition  the  King  that  all  who  possessed  books  of 
suspected  doctrine,  especially  in  English,  printed  on 
either  side  of  the  sea,  should  give  them  up  within 
three  months  after  warning  to  persons  appointed  by 
convoca-  the  King  ;  and  further,  that  His  Majesty  would  deign 
the  ml  ^^  ^llow  Holy  Scripture  to  be  translated  by  good  men 
to  be  named  by  him,  and  forbid,  under  a  penalty,  any 
layman  among  his  subjects  to  dispute  on  articles  of 
the  Faith,  or  on  Holy  Scripture.^ 

It  may  possibly  be,  though  there  is  no  evidence  of 
the  fact,  that  the  bishops  and  clergy  were  by  this 
time  aware  of  the  last  thing  Tyndale  had  done 
abroad.  In  November  he  had  just  completed  a 
revised  edition  of  his  New  Testament,  so  that  a 
translation  by  authority  in  England  was  all  the  more 
requisite  to  correct  the  poison  of  what  was  certainly 
considered  a  heretical  and  objectionable  version. 
But  whether  aware  of  this  or  not,  the  bishops 
certainly  thought  it  time  to  set  to  work  upon  an 
English  version,  and  it  is  not  true,  as  we  are  often 
told,  that  they  did  nothing,  and  cared  to  do  nothing, 
in  the  matter.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  result  of 
their  labours  appears  to  have  been  lost,  and  the  con- 
stant sneer  of  followers  of  the  New  Learning  that  the 
bishops  did  nothing  has  acquired  plausibility  from  the 
fact  that  what  they  did  does  not  appear  to  be  extant. 

^  Wilkins,  iii.  769-70  ;  cp.  p.  776.  Tlie  former  entry  is  taken  from 
Heylin's  excerpts  from  the  Convocation  Records  :  the  latter  from  an  extant 
MS.  of  tlie  time  in  the  Cottonian  Library. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        267 

But  one  bishop,  at  least,  was  deeply  interested  in 
the  project,  and,  notwithstanding  many  other  calls 
upon  him,  which  were  certainly  increased  by  the 
multiplicity  of  royal  commands  at  this  period, 
Stephen  Gardiner  completed,  by  his  own  labour,  Gardiner 
an  English  version  of  two  of  the  Gospels.  two  ome 

This  fact,  which  is  incidentally  mentioned  by  Gospels. 
Gardiner  himself  in  a  letter  to  Cromwell,  seems  to 
be  regarded  by  one  of  our  biblical  historians  as  an 
excellent  joke,^  though  why  we  should  disbelieve 
Gardiner's  own  statement  in  black  and  white,  which 
Cromwell,  to  whom  it  was  addressed,  apparently 
never  challenged,  is  not  apparent.  It  is  believed, 
of  course,  that  Gardiner  was  the  very  last  man  in 
the  world  to  think  of  translating  the  Bible.  That 
the  reader  may  form  his  own  opinion,  however,  I 
quote  the  whole  passage  in  which  the  statement 
occurs,  premising  only  that  the  beginning  of  the  letter 
relates  to  the  execution  of  some  commands  laid  upon 
the  bishops  by  the  King,  the  nature  of  which  is  not 
expressed.^  Then  comes  another  matter  which  has 
an  interest  of  its  own,  though  our  information  about 
it  is  imperfect : — 

As  touching  children,  I  have  delivered  these  verses  herein 
enclosed,  to  be  learned,  to  the  scholars  of  Winchester.  To 
other  petty  teachers  I  give  commandment  in  general.  This  is 
done  onward,  and  more  shall  be  if  ye  think  necessary;  whereof 
I  pray  you  take  the  pain  to  advertise  me.  And  although,  as 
I  have  devised  the  words  to  be  spoken,  I  preach  the  matter 
upon  Sunday  next  in  every  man's  mouth,  yet  will  I  preach 
also,  omitting  all  other  respects  of  myself,  rather  than  I 
should  be  otherwise  taken  than  I  am, — that  is  to  say,  openly 
to  swear  one  thing  and  privily  to  work,  say,  or  do  otherwise ; 
whereof  I  was  never  guilty.  Nevertheless  I  have  as  great 
cause  as  any  man  to  desire  rest  and  quiet  for  the  health  of 
my  body ;  whereunto  I  thought  to  have  intended,  and  to 
abstain  from  books  and  writing,  having  finished  the  trans- 

1  Anderson,  i.  453. 

2  Probably  it  liad  to  do  with  the  vahiation  of  benefices.  See  Gardiner's 
letter  a  month  earlier.     L.  P.,  viii.  654. 


268   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

lation  of  St.  Luke  and  St.  John,  wherein  I  have  spent  a 
great  labor.^ 

It  will  be  observed  that  Gardiner  mentions  his 
biblical  labours  only  incidentally.  His  letter  was 
about  other  things.  The  matter  to  be  preached  was 
no  doubt  the  King's  Supremacy,  and  children  at 
school  were  to  be  taught  the  new  doctrine  in  verses 
which  they  were  to  repeat  by  rote.  But  as  regards 
the  translation  of  the  two  Gospels,  surely  nothing  is 
less  like  a  joke  or  a  statement  that  could  have  been 
intended  to  mislead.  There  was  one  bishop,  how- 
ever, it  seems,  not  so  compliant  as  Gardiner.  On  this 
subject  I  may  as  well  quote  a  passage  in  Strype, 
familiar  enough  to  students  of  the  early  English 
Bible,  the  information  in  which  is  derived  from  Foxe's 
MSS.  The  general  ordering  of  the  translation  was 
naturally  committed  to  Archbishop  Cranmer,  and  the 
mode  in  which  it  was  done  was  as  follows  : — 

How  First,  he  began  with  the  translation  of  the  New  Testament, 

Cranmer      taking  an  old  English  translation  thereof,  which  he  divided 
forTn  "^"^      into  nine  or  ten  parts,  causing  each  part  to  be  written  at  large 
Eugiish       in  a  paper  book,  and  then  to  be  sent  to  the  best  learned  bishops 
^fTh'^^N^^  and  others,  to  the  intent  they  should  make  a  perfect  correc- 
Testament.  tion  thereof.     And  when  they  had  done,  he  required  them  to 
send  back  their  parts,  so  corrected,  unto  him  at  Lambeth  by 
a  day  limited  for  that  purpose.     And  the  same  course,  no 
question,  he  took  with  the  Old  Testament.     It  chanced  that 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  were  sent  to  Bishop  Stokesley  [of 
London]  to  oversee  and  correct.     When  the  day  came,  every 
man  had  sent  to  Lambeth  their  parts  corrected  ;  only  Stokes- 
ley's  portion  was  wanting.     My  lord  of  Canterbury  wrote  to 
the  Bishop  a  letter  for  his  part,  requiring  him  to  deliver 
them  unto  the  bringer,  his  Secretary.     He  received  the  Arch- 
bishop's letter  at  Fulham,  unto  which  he  made  this  answer : — 
"  I  marvel  what  my  lord  of  Canterbury  meaneth,  that  thus 
abuseth  the  people,  in  giving  them  liberty  to  read  the  Scrip- 
tures, which  doth  nothing  else  but  infect  them  with  heresy. 
I  have  bestowed  never  an  hour  upon  my  portion,  nor  never 

1  State  Papers,  i.  430. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        269 

will.  And  therefore  my  lord  shall  have  his  book  again,  for  I 
will  never  be  guilty  of  bringing  the  simple  people  into  error." 
My  lord  of  Canterbury's  servant  took  the  book  and  brought 
the  same  to  Lambeth  unto  my  Lord,  declaring  my  Lord  of 
London's  answer.  When  the  Archbishop  had  perceived  that 
the  Bishop  had  done  nothing  therein,  "  I  marvel,"  said  he, 
"  that  my  Lord  of  London  is  so  froward  that  he  will  not  do 
as  other  men  do."  One  Mr.  Thomas  Lawney  stood  by ;  and 
hearing  my  Lord  speak  so  much  of  the  Bishop's  untoward- 
ness,  said  "  I  can  tell  your  Grace  why  my  Lord  of  London 
will  not  bestow  any  labor  or  pains  this  way.  Your  Grace 
knoweth  well  that  his  portion  is  a  piece  of  New  Testament. 
But  he  being  persuaded  that  Christ  had  bequeathed  him 
nothing  in  his  Testament,  thought  it  mere  madness  to  bestow 
any  labor  or  pain  where  no  gain  was  to  be  gotten.  And, 
besides  this,  it  is  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  which  were 
simple  poor  fellows,  and  therefore  my  Lord  of  London  dis- 
dained to  have  to  do  with  any  of  them."  Whereat  my  lord 
of  Canterbury  and  others  that  stood  by  could  not  forbear 
from  laughter.^ 

The  authority  for  this  story  is  a  very  good  one, 
for  the  MS.  which  Strype  followed  was  a  writing  of 
Cranmer's  own  secretary,  Ralph  Morice — in  fact,  of 
the  very  secretary  whom  the  Archbishop  despatched 
on  this  matter  to  Bishop  Stokesley.  Moreover,  Strype 
has  followed  his  authority  closely,  for  except  at  the 
beginning  he  has  simply  transcribed  every  word  with 
the  least  possible  alteration  to  adapt  it  to  his  own 
narrative ;  and  the  flavour  of  the  original  telling  by 
Morice  is  preserved.  But  as  to  the  first  sentence  it 
is  to  be  remarked  that  Morice  does  not  speak  of  the 
Archbishop  having  made  use  of  "an  old  English 
translation  "  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  basis,  and  he 
says  nothing  whatever,  of  course,  of  what  Strype 
himself  only  mentions  as  a  presumption,  that  the  like 
was  done  with  the  Old  Testament.  The  words  of 
Morice  are  simply  : — 

My  Lord  Cranmer,  minding  to  have  the  New  Testament 
thoroughly  corrected,  divided  the  same  into  nine  or  ten  parts 

1  Strype's  Cranmer,  i.  48,  49. 


270  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

and  caused  it  to  be  written  at  large  in  paper  books,  and  sent 
imto  the  best  learned  bishops,  etc.^ 

If  Strype's  version  of  the  story  here  had  been  fully 
vouched  for  by  his  authority,  we  should  have  thought 
the  "old  English  translation"  which  Cranmer  took 
must  have  been  a  Wycliffite  one,  or  perhaps  an 
earlier  still ;  for  Tyndale's  was  a  very  modern  one, 
besides  being  such  as  the  bishops  would  most  likely 
have  declined  even  to  use  as  a  basis.  Yet,  strange  to 
say,  Anderson,  who  had  no  other  authority  than 
Strype  to  go  by,  quietly  observes  that  "  Cranmer 
took  an  existing  translation — Tyndale's,  of  course,  for 
as  yet  there  was  no  other." "  There  certainly  were 
others  in  existence,  and  though  we  do  not  know  posi- 
tively that  it  was  an  "  old "  version,  I  am  rather 
inclined  to  think  it  was. 

But  the  main  thing  to  be  noted  in  this  well- 
authenticated  story  is  that  it  confirms  one  statement 
that  I  have  made  above.  Not  only  did  the  bishops 
generally  in  1534  petition  the  King  to  let  them  get  a 
new  translation  made,  but  they  really  co-operated  to 
bishops,  produce  one.  Every  bishop  did  his  part,  with  the 
with  one  single  exception,  it  would  seem,  of  Stokesley,  who,  we 
co-^opeJate.  scc,  disapproved  of  the  attempt,  thinking  it  would  do 
more  harm  than  good,  and  lead  the  laity  into  heresy 
by  encouraging  every  man  to  interpret  the  sacred 
text  for  himself  without  reference  to  the  well-con- 
sidered opinions  of  great  divines  and  scholars.  If 
this  be  so,  a  question  arises  whether  Bishop  Stokesley 
was  present  in  the  Convocation  of  1534,  where  the 
wording  of  the  record  rather  seems  to  imply  that  the 
resolution  in  favour  of  a  new  translation  was  passed 
by  the  bishops  unanimously.  But  possibly  the  words 
of  the  record  really  mean  that  only  the  resolution 
touching  heretical  books  was  passed  unanimously,  and 
that  the  resolution  which  followed  it,  touching  a  new 

1  See  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation  (Camden  Society),  p.  277. 
"^  Annals  of  the  Bible,  i.  453. 


CH.  1         STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        271 

translation,  was  passed  by  the  bishops  generally.^ 
Anyhow,  we  are  given  to  understand  that  the  bishops, 
one  and  all,  except  Stokesley,  sent  in  to  the  Arch- 
bishop at  Lambeth  the  portions  allotted  to  them,  so 
that  a  number  of  MSS.,  forming  together  a  nearly 
complete  English  New  Testament  of  episcopal  origin, 
were  among  the  treasures  of  Lambeth  in  the  year 
1535.     What  has  become  of  them  ? 

On  the  4th  October  Coverdale  completed  his  great 
labour,  and  for  the  first  time  there  existed  a  printed 
edition  of  the  whole  Bible  in  English.  Where  had  it 
been  printed  ?  Scholars  for  a  long  time  could  not 
answer  the  question.  But  more  than  forty  years  ago 
Dr.  Grinsburg  produced  what  seems  quite  conclusive 
evidence  that  it  issued  from  the  press  of  Froschover 
at  Zurich.^  We  must  not,  however,  suppose  that  Coverdaie's 
Coverdale  at  once  betook  himself  to  Zurich  when  he  ^l^^^l^^  ^t 
left  England  in  1528  ;  for  it  was  not  likely  that  he  zmich, 
should  have  gone  so  far  in  the  first  instance,  and  we 
have  seen  already  that  he  was  with  Tyndale  at  Ham- 
burg in  1529.  Possibly — indeed  I  think,  probably — 
before  he  went  to  Hamburg  he  had  gone  to  the 
Netherlands,  the  country  from  which  the  largest 
amount  of  heretical  literature  was  imported  into 
England,  and  where  English  heretics,  until  particu- 
larly sought  after,  could  often  rest  for  a  time  toler- 
ably secure.  This,  it  is  true,  is  only  surmise,  but  we 
have  a  piece  of  testimony  of  a  later  date  which  goes 
far  to  confirm  it. 

In  the  life  of  Emanuel  van  Meteren,  prefixed  to  his 
Nederlandtsche  Historic,  in  1614,  and  written  by  his 
friend  the  Reverend  Symeon  Ruytinck,  it  is  stated 
that  he  was  born  at  Antwerp  in  1535,  and  that  he 

1  I  think  this  must  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  words,  for  we  have  no 
record  of  any  illness  of  Bishop  Stokesley  that  could  have  kept  him  out  of 
Convocation  in  December  1534.  Whether  he  attended  the  Parliament  at 
that  date  cannot  be  ascertained  as  the  Roll  of  the  year  is  wanting. 

^  See  Kitto's  Cyclupadia  of  Biblical  Literature  (1862),  i.  567-0  ;  also  Dr. 
Ginsburg's  Ecclesiastes,  App.  ii. 


272   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

was  the  son  of  Jacob   van  Meteren  of  Breda,  who 
"  displayed  his  especial  zeal  in  defraying  the  cost  of 
though  the  translating  and  printing  the  English  Bible  in  Antwerp, 
was°  helped  employing  for  that  purpose  the  services  of  a  learned 
by  student.    Miles    Coverdale   by    name,    to    the    great 

Meteren.  advancement  of  the  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ  in 
England."  Moreover,  we  are  informed  by  Mr,  Moens, 
the  editor  of  the  Register  of  the  Dutch  Church  at 
Austin  Friars,  that  the  Reverend  Symeon  Ruytinck 
was  the  senior  minister  of  that  church,  and  Emanuel 
van  Meteren  was  "  one  of  the  oldest  members  of  the 
congregation  and  the  leading  member  of  the  merchant 
strangers,  as  the  Netherland  Consul,"  so  that  there 
must  have  been  constant  communication  between 
them.^  Thus  the  information,  though  by  no  means 
contemporary,  must  be  considered  of  high  importance. 
Mr.  Moens  adds  :  "  The  whole  history  of  the  English 
Bible  of  1535  must  have  been  well  known  to  both; 
to  Van  Meteren  from  his  parents  and  to  Ruytinck  as 
conservator  of  the  archives  of  the  church."  But  surely 
some  allowance  as  regards  detail  must  be  made  for  the 
lapse  of  time,  and  Mr.  Moens  himself  sees  reason  to 
suspect  that  the  words  "and  printing"  in  Ruytinck's 
statement  are  inaccurate ;  for  they  are  not  warranted 
by  a  document  which  he  presumes  Ruytinck  intended 
to  follow,  but  cited  only  from  memory.  This  was 
an  affidavit  of  Emanuel  Meteren,  discovered  by  Mr. 
Moens  himself  among  the  archives  of  the  Dutch 
Church,  which  is  so  important  that  I  reproduce  it 
here : — 

Emanuel  Demetrius,  marchant  of  Andwarp,  aged  about 
74  yeares,  doth  witnes  and  can  depose  that  he  was  brought  in 
England  Anno  1550,  in  King  Edward's  the  6  dayes  by  his 
father,  a  furtherer  of  reformed  religion,  and  he  that  caused 
the  first  Bible  at  his  costes  to  be  Englissled  {sic)  by  Mr.  Myles 
Coverdal  in  Andwarp,  the  which  his  father,  with  Mr.  Edward 
Whytchurch,  printed  both  in  Paris  and  London ;  by  which 

1  The  Dutch  Church  Registers,  London,  Historical  Introduction,  p.  xiv. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        273 

meanes  he,  wel  acquaynted,  was  one  of  the  Suters  for  the 
erection  of  a  Dutche  Church  at  the  Augustin  Fryers,  and  made 
this  Deponent  a  member  of  the  same  Anno  1552. 

And  he  doth  wel  remember  that  the  Churchyeard  and 
houses  on  bothe  sydes  of  the  West  dore  of  the  Church  were 
inhabited  and  possessed  by  the  Members  of  the  Church,  and 
harde  his  father  and  others  of  the  Elders  of  the  Churche 
often  tymes  consel  of  buylding  there,  and  making  of  another 
dore  for  the  Churche  at  the  Cestern  to  recey ve  the  rayn water 
of  the  Churche  to  the  vse  of  washing  or  bleaching. 

But  the  sayd  Church,  Anno  1553,  in  Queen  Mary's  time 
was  left,  and  the  Members  dispersed,  and  for  a  time  was  vsed 
for  the  Queen's  storehouse  for  provision  of  a  navy  that  went 
to  Conquet  in  Brittaine,  and  afterwards  vsed  by  the 
Florentyns  marchants  to  say  masse  in,  the  Dutche  pulpet 
always  remayning  in  it. 

At  the  Queen  Elizabeth's  coming  to  the  Crowne,  the 
former  gift  of  King  Edward  was  fully  confirmed  to  the 
Strangers  agayne,  which  bestowed  great  reparations,  but  the 
Churchyeard  was  then  occupied  by  the  then  lord  Tresuror, 
Marquis  of  Winchester,  and  his  heyres,  who  plucked  down 
the  lead  of  the  Quyre  and  covered  it  with  tyles  that  was  in 
their  possession,  and  the  vse  of  the  churchyeard  was  dififerred 
and,  lest  to  offend,  neglected,  yet  often  interpellation  made. 
Thus  much  I  can  depose,  in  London,  28  of  May  1609. 

{Signed)  Emanuel  Demetrius.^ 

Interesting  as  this  document  is  throughout,  we  are 
of  course  only  concerned  with  the  first  paragraph 
here,  which,  it  will  be  seen,  fully  bears  out  the 
statement  that  Coverdale  translated  the  Bible  at  the 
expense  of  the  elder  Meteren.  And  this  explains 
just  what  we  were  seeking  to  understand — how, 
having  for  the  time  lost  Cromwell's  patronage,  he  was 
enabled  to  go  on  with  the  great  work  that  Cromwell 
had  originally  set  him  on,  by  the  zeal  and  liberality, 
perhaps  we  might  also  say  by  the  enterprise,  of 
a  flourishing  trader  abroad.  But  this  deposition, 
it  must  be  remembered,  is  far  from  being  con- 
temporary.    In  fact,  it  is  only  a  conscientious  state- 

1  Van  Meteren  or  Demetrius  ;  according  to  the  custom  of  the  day,  learned 
and  eminent  men  gave  a  Latin  rendering  to  their  names. 

VOL.  II  T 


274  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

ment  made  by  one  who  was  born  in  the  very  year 
when  Coverdale's  Bible  first  appeared ;  and  though  it 
fully  warrants  us  in  believing  that  his  father  bore 
Coverdale's  expenses  in  translating  the  Bible  into 
English,  it  does  not  follow  that  his  father  printed  the 
first  edition.  It  was  another  Bible,  though  mostly 
made  up  from  Coverdale's,  that  "  his  father  with  Mr. 
Edward  Whytchurch  printed  in  Paris  and  London  " 
three  years  later. 

That  Jacob  van  Meteren,  who  had  enabled  Cover- 
dale  to  live  while  translating  the  Bible,  would  willingly 
have  printed  the  first  edition  of  it  may  be  taken  for 
granted ;    but  it  seems  from  what  has  been  already 
said  that  it  was  printed  at  Zurich.     And  it  is  further 
shown  by  Dr.  Ginsburg  that  not  only  does  the  typo- 
graphy declare  unmistakably  that  it  emanated  from 
the   press   of  Froschover,   but  the  translation  itself 
follows  closely,  even  in  the  headings  of  the  chapters, 
that  of  the  German  Swiss  Bible  printed  by  him  in 
1531.     It  seems,  therefore,  that  whatever  progress  he 
may  have  made  with  the  work  at  Antwerp  with  the 
assistance   he  had  received  from    Meteren,  it  could 
only  have  been  in  manuscript.     Probably  he  found  it 
unsafe  to  remain  at  Antwerp  and  was  obliged  to  shift 
his  quarters ;   or,  it  may  be,  Meteren  found  it  unsafe 
to  print  for  him.     At  Zurich,  no  doubt,  he  not  only 
enjoyed  greater  security  but  also  met  with  the  same 
zealous  and  liberal  assistance  that  had  been  given 
him  by  Meteren  at  Antwerp ;  for  Froschover  was  a 
warm  friend  to  scholars,  especially  to  Reformers.     And 
when  the  great  enterprise  was  at  length  completed, 
there  was  no  doubt  good  reason  to  believe  that  it 
could  be  made  to  pay  its  expenses  ;  for  Coverdale's  old 
patron,  Cromwell,  was  no  longer  in  fear  of  the  Church, 
but    was   the    Church's    master,    and    so   was    in    a 
position  to  turn  his  biblical  labours  to  considerable 
account.     For  he  was  by  this  time  the  King's  Vicar- 
General  in  spiritual  matters,  and  probably  would  have 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE   ENGLISH   BIBLE        275 

little  difficulty  in  imposing  an  English  Bible  on  the 
clergy,  even  by  his  own  authority.  Doubtless  Meteren 
and  the  Flemish  traders  had  been  able  to  get  him 
spoken  to  on  the  subject,  even  before  the  book  arrived 
in  Ens^land. 

There  had  been  for  some  years  before  this  a  large 
influx  into  England  of  books  printed  abroad,  even 
English  books,  many  of  them.      This  was  counted  a 
grievance,  and  by  an  Act  of  the  25th  of  Henry  VIIL,^ 
passed  to  encourage  English  industries,  it  was  forbidden 
under  a   penalty  of  six   shillings  and  eightpence    a 
volume  to  buy  books  printed  abroad,  ready  bound  in 
leather  or  parchment,  for  sale  in  England,  after  Christ- 
mas 1534;   or  to  buy  any  books  printed  abroad,  of 
aliens,  except  wholesale.     This  Act  was  naturally  an 
obstacle  to  the  commercial  success  of  the  new  Bible, 
but  a  device  was  found  to  disarm  suspicions,  as  well  as, 
perhaps,  to  remove  other  objections.     The  first  sheet,  it  was 
with    the    title-page    and   preliminary   matter,    was  f^  En^i^nd 
removed  and  a   new  sheet   substituted,    which    was  with  a  new 
undoubtedly  printed  by  James  Nycolson  of  South-  *^^^®-P^se. 
wark.      No  complete  copy  of  the  original  sheet  and 
title-page  now  exists,  and  only  one  copy  is  known 
of  two  leaves  of  that  sheet,  including  the  original 
title-page   printed   by  Froschover.      The  new  title- 
page  contained  a  change  in  the  wording,  for  it  omitted 
a  statement  honestly  made  on  the  face  of  the  work 
that  it  was  "  translated  out  of  Douche  "  (that  is  to 
say,  German)  "  and  Latyn."     Evidently  such  a  con- 
fession was  not  thought  to  be  a  recommendation.^ 
So  a  new  title-page  and  a  new  sheet  of  preliminary 
matter  were  inserted,   with  which   the  volume   was 
issued  and  reissued  in  three  successive  years,  as  there 
are   dated    editions    of   1535,    1536,    and    1537,    all 
bearing  the  same  corrected  title-page.     The  first  two 

1  Stat.  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  15. 

^  A  strangely  different  inference  was  drawn  by  Mr.  Fry,  but  surely  the 
object  of  the  suppression  is  obvious. 


2/6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

mentioned  Queen  Anne,  that  is  to  say,  Anne  Boleyn, 
in  the  dedication  to  the  King ;  the  last  Queen  Jane, 
that  is  to  say,  Jane  Seymour.^ 

That  Cromwell  sought  to  recommend  this  Bible  for 
political  reasons  in  the  days  of  Anne  Boleyn  there 
cannot  be  a  doubt.  On  the  20th  February  1536 
Chapuys  writes  about  it  to  Granvelle  (under  the  mis- 
taken impression  which,  we  have  seen,  it  was  an 
object  to  promote,  that  the  whole  book  was  printed 
in  England) : — "  A  Bible  has  been  printed  here  in 
England  in  which  the  texts  that  favour  the  Queen  [i.e. 
the  late  Queen  Katharine],  especially  Deuteronomy 
xix.,  have  been  translated  in  the  opposite  sense."'" 
The  reference,  Deut.  xix.,  is  evidently  a  mistake, 
for  there  is  nothing  in  that  chapter  about  marriage 
with  a  deceased  brother's  wife.  The  passage  intended 
was  undoubtedly  Deut.  xxv.  5,  in  which  Coverdale, 
advised,  as  we  may  suppose,  by  some  scholars  of 
the  day,  substituted,  "hir  kynsman"  for  "her 
husband's  brother."  Elsewhere,  as  in  Leviticus 
xviii.  16,  this  Bible  might  be  quoted  in  justification 
of  the  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  so  long  as  that 
was  an  object.  But  Anne  was  brought  to  the  block, 
and  her  marriage  declared  null,  in  May  of  the  same 
year.     Still,  the  King  adhered  to  the  view  that  his 

1  See  The  Bible  by  Coverdale,  ■.  MDXXXV .  By  Francis  Fry,  F.S.A., 
London,  1867.  This  brief  and  careful  treatise,  with  facsimiles  from  the 
different  issues,  is  most  valuable  for  the  information  which  it  gives,  but  some 
of  the  inferences  seem  to  have  been  made  in  ignorance  that  Dr.  Ginsburg  had 
already  proved  decisively  that  the  book  was  printed  by  Froschover  at  Zurich, 
and  also  that  Coverdale  could  not  have  translated  it  from  the  Hebrew  (see 
authorities  cited  at  p.  271,  note  2).  It  is  strange  also  that  not  only  Mr.  Fry, 
but  other  commentators  before  him,  should  have  discredited  Coverdale's  own 
words  that  the  work  was  "translated  out  of  Douche  and  Latyn,"  and  sup- 
posed that  they  were  withdrawn  by  Coverdale  himself  because  he  had  really 
examined  the  Hebrew  text !  The  only  written  evidence  that  might  suggest 
a  knowledge  of  Hebrew  on  his  part  is  his  joint  letter  with  Grafton  to  Crom- 
well in  1538  (State  Papers,  i.  576)  ;  but  the  words  do  not  necessarily  bear  this 
meaning,  for  the  Bible  to  which  they  refer  was  partly  Tyndale's.  And 
Coverdale  further  says  in  his  dedication  to  the  King  that  he  translated  ' '  out 
of  five  sundry  interpreters."  He  clearly  never  claimed  originality  as  a  trans- 
lator. At  the  same  time  he  very  likely  took  the  opinion  of  some  Hebrew 
scholar  about  one  or  two  passages  like  Deut.  xxv.  5,  to  which  I  am  about 
to  refer.  ^  L.  P.,  x.  352. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        277 

first  marriage  was  unlawful ;  and,  apart  from  its  ex- 
position of  the  Levitical  law,  the  value  of  a  whole 
printed  Bible  in  English  required  little  argument  to 
set  it  forth. 

In  August  of  the  same  year  Cromwell,  as  the 
King's  Vicegerent  (now  also  Lord  Privy  Seal),  issued 
a  set  of  injunctions  to  the  clergy,  one  article  of  ordered 
which  required  the  incumbent  of  every  parish  to  J]]^^^^  .^ 
procure,  before  the  feast  of  St.  Peter  ad  Vincula  next  churches. 
coming — that  is  to  say,  the  1st  August  in  the  follow- 
ing year — a  whole  Bible  in  Latin  and  also  one  in 
English,  to  be  placed  in  the  choir  for  the  use  of  any 
who  chose  to  read  them.  The  only  printed  English 
Bible  procurable  at  that  time  was  Coverdale's,  and  it 
would  seem  that  Cromwell  was  bent  on  turning  the 
project,  which  he  had  so  long  ago  encouraged  Cover- 
dale  to  undertake,  into  a  good  mercantile  speculation. 
It  may  be  doubted,  indeed,  whether  the  pecuniary  aid 
which  he  had  given  to  Coverdale  before  his  flight 
from  England  was  on  a  very  liberal  scale,  for  at  that 
time  the  translator  could  not  have  made  much  pro- 
gress with  the  work,  and  Cromwell  was  not  the  man 
to  invest  money  in  a  scheme  from  which  there  was 
little  hope  of  profit.  In  Wolsey's  time,  moreover, 
he  could  never  have  expected  to  be  able  greatly  to 
promote  the  sale  of  the  book  by  his  own  personal 
influence.  But  now  he  had  much  in  his  power.  He 
believed  that  he  could  compel  every  parish  clergyman 
in  England  to  purchase  a  copy  before  August  1537. 
But  apparently  some  obstacles  presented  themselves, 
and  this  clause,  though  included  in  the  injunctions  of 
1536  as  printed  by  Bertholet,  was  omitted  in  the 
copy  in  Cranmer's  Register.^  There  was,  moreover, 
inserted  in  the  other  set  of  injunctions  issued  two 
years  later,  in   September  1538,  a  similar  order  to 

1  Pocock,  in  his  edition  of  Burnet,  says  that  it  is  found  in  Bonner's 
Register,  though  not  in  Cranmer's  ;  which  is  curious,  as  Bonner  was  not  a 
bishop  in  1536. 


2/8   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

provide  for  each  church  a  "  whole  Bible  of  the  largest 
volume  "  in  English,  nothing  being  there  said  about  a 
Latin  one,  and  there  seems  every  reason  to  believe 
that  the  order  of  1536  about  Bibles  could  not  have 
been  generally  enforced. 

The  question  whether  the  Bible  were  the  only 
rule  of  faith,  assumed  an  acute  form  in  the  year 
1537.  A  "  book  of  Articles  "  had  been  published  the 
year  before  by  royal  authority,  setting  forth  some 
cardinal  principles  of  the  Church,  including  Transub- 
stantiation  and  the  three  Sacraments  of  Baptism,  of 
Penance,  and  of  the  Altar,  nothing  being  said  about 
the  other  four  generally  recognised.  This  seems  to 
have  been  intended  as  a  kind  of  compromise,  for  it 
contained  nothing  at  variance  with  old  beliefs,  and 
could  only  be  considered  unsatisfactory  on  points  on 
which  it  was  silent.  But  since  then  had  occurred 
the  great  Northern  Rebellion,  or  series  of  rebellions 
rather,  largely  occasioned  by  the  putting  down  of  the 
minor  monasteries,  and  the  belief  that  religion  was 
being  tampered  with  by  Cromwell  as  the  King's 
Vicegerent,  aided  by  bishops  who  had  owed  their 
promotion  to  their  approval  of  the  marriage  with 
Anne  Boleyn.  Anne  Boleyn  was  now  gone,  but  her 
bishops  remained,  and  the  hope  generally  enter- 
tained at  first  that  with  the  unhappy  Queen's  fall 
the  King  and  kingdom  would  return  to  their  old 
spiritual  allegiance  had  been  rudely  dissipated. 
The  King,  however,  evidently  felt  it  necessary  to 
show  that  he  was  meditating  no  unjustifiable 
changes  ;  and  no  sooner  had  the  rebellions  in  the 
North  been  repressed,  the  failure  of  which  men  even 
then  imprudently  regretted,  than  he  caused  his 
bishops  and  divines  to  assemble  at  Westminster  to 
consider  the  terms  of  a  new  and  more  complete 
religious  settlement.  The  bishops  began  to  meet  in 
February  1537,  and  continued  their  sittings  till  the 
middle    of  July ;    when,    among    other    satisfactory 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        279 

results,  it  was  given  out  that  the  four  Sacraments 
omitted  in  last  year's  formulary  were  "  found  again."  ^ 
The  final  issue  of  their  deliberations  was  the  little  "The 
treatise  called  The  Institution  of  a  CJiristian  Man,  bq^j"?-^ 
more  popularly  named  "  the  Bishops'  Book." 

During  these  deliberations,  one  day  when  Crom- 
well presided  in  the  Assembly  as  the  King's  Vicar- 
General,  he  introduced  to  the  bishops  the  Scotsman, 
John  Alane,  better  known  by  his  Latinised  name  of 
Alesius,'  as  the  King's  scholar,  for  whom  he  desired  a 
respectful  and  indifferent  hearing.  Alesius  thereupon 
spoke  in  support  of  Cranmer  against  the  proposition 
maintained  by  most  of  the  other  bishops  that  there 
were  seven  Sacraments,  and  when  answered  by 
Bishop  Stokesley,  who  ventured  to  maintain  it  by 
what  Alesius  himself,  describing  the  discussion, 
elegantly  calls  "  certain  stinking  glosses  and  old 
lousy  writers,"  replied  again,  offering  to  prove  next 
day  that  the  Christian  faith  rested  only  on  what  was 
written  in  the  Bible.  His  intrusion  in  the  debate 
was  naturally  resented,  and  Cranmer  himself  felt 
compelled  to  warn  him,  as  even  Cromwell  did  also, 

1  i.  p.,  XII.  i.  789  (p.  346). 

^  I  must  here  correct,  I  fear,  more  than  one  error  of  my  own  on  this 
matter.  The  explicit  date,  1537,  given  by  Alesius  himself  to  this  incident 
had  been  questioned  by  others  (see  Hardwick's  Reformation,  p.  182,  n.  5), 
and  in  my  English  Church  in  the  Sixteenth  Century,  p.  175,  I  followed 
Canon  Dixon  in  referring  it  to  the  discussion  in  Convocation  on  the  Ten 
Articles  in  1536.  But  the  presumption  founded  on  the  fact  that  Bishop 
Foxe  is  described  as  having  newly  come  out  of  Germany  ought  scarcely,  I 
think,  to  discredit  the  date  given  by  the  author  himself,  seeing  that  all  else 
agrees  just  as  well  with  the  spring  of  the  following  year,  and,  indeed,  even 
better  ;  for  the  articles  agreed  to  in  1536  could  not  have  occasioned  much,  if 
any,  controversy,  whereas  in  1537  the  question  was  about  a  fuller  statement 
of  doctrine.  Moreover,  the  book  in  which  this  date  is  given  ("Of  the 
Auctorite  of  the  Word  of  God ")  would  seem  to  have  been  piiblished  in 
1538 — not  within  five  years  of  the  arrival  of  its  author,  Alesius,  in  England, 
as  I  have  stated  in  L.  P.,  xii.  i.  790  (p.  346  n.),  but  five  years  after  his  Epis- 
tola  contra  dccretum  quoddam  Episcoporum  in  Scotia  quod  prohihet  legere 
Novi  Testamenti  lihros  lingua  vernacula.  This  book,  of  which  there  is  a 
copy  in  the  Grenville  Library  in  the  British  Museum,  is  distinctly  dated 
1533,  and  it  was  written  and  published  when  he  was  in  Germany.  His  book 
on  the  "Word  of  God,"  therefore,  was  presumably  published  in  1538,  the 
year  after  the  incident  had  taken  place,  and  is  not  likely  to  have  been  ^v^ong 
about  the  date. 


28o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.iv 

not  to  appear  again,  though  Cromwell  had,  not  long 
before,  for  his  own  part,  rebuked  Bishop  Stokesley  for 
defending  "  unwritten  verities."  In  short,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  it  had  been  Cromwell's  policy,  by  the  aid 
of  Alesius  and  of  the  Anne  Boleyn  bishops,  to  lower 
the  received  standard  of  the  Church's  teaching,  but 
he  had  found  it  expedient  to  forbear. 

But  the  policy  of  forcing  an  English  Bible  upon 
the  use  of  the  Church  was,  as  we  have  seen,  by  no 
means  given  up,  for  it  was  enforced  again  by  the 
second  set  of  royal  injunctions  issued  in  1538. 
Meanwhile,  in  the  August  of  the  same  year,  1537,  a 
A  new  new  EugHsh  Bible  makes  its  appearance  quite 
Kbfe!^  suddenly,  in  very  remarkable  circumstances.  The 
bishops  had  completed  their  "  Book  "  in  the  middle 
of  July,  and  had  been  glad  to  escape  from  London, 
where  there  was  great  mortality  from  a  visita- 
tion of  the  plague.^  Archbishop  Cranmer  had  got 
down  to  Ford  in  Kent,  when  he  wrote  to  Crom- 
well in  praise  of  this  new  translation,  of  which  he 
sent  him  a  copy  by  the  bearer  of  his  letter.  He 
liked  it  better  than  any  previous  translation.  It 
might,  no  doubt,  have  faults  which  could  be  from 
time  to  time  amended ;  but  he  begged  Cromwell  to 
show  it  to  the  King,  to  whom  it  was  dedicated,  and 
obtain  his  licence,  if  possible,  that  it  might  be  sold, 
and  that  every  one  might  read  it  freely,  "  until  such 
time,"  he  writes,  "  that  we,  the  Bishops,  shall  set 
forth  a  better  translation,  which  I  think  will  not  be 
till  a  day  after  Doomsday  !  "  ^ 

Cromwell  did  present  it  to  the  King  and  obtained 
the  licence  required.^  But  whence  did  this  Bible 
come,  of  which  we  have  no  earlier  notice  ?  Did  the 
translator  bring  it  down  to  Cranmer  in  Kent,  or 
could  the  Archbishop  have  brought  it  with  him  from 
London  ?     And  were  Cromwell  and  the  King  wholly 

^  L.  p.,  XII.  ii.  293.  "^  L.  P.,  xii.  ii.  434  ;  State  Papers,  i.  561. 

^  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  512. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        281 

unprepared  for  its  appearance  ?  The  last  supposition 
is  scarcely  probable.  Yet  the  origin  of  the  book  was 
certainly  mysterious.  On  the  title-page  it  professed 
to  contain  "  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  truly  and 
purely  translated  into  English  by  Thomas  Matthew." 
The  name  was  a  fiction.  In  fact,  the  title-page  itself 
was  a  fiction,  intended  to  convey  the  impression  of 
being,  what  Cranmer  distinctly  calls  it,  a  new  trans- 
lation.^ For  it  was  no  new  translation  at  all,  but  a 
compound  of  two  which  had  already  appeared.  The 
first  books  of  the  Old  Testament  to  the  end  of  the 
Second  Book  of  Chronicles,  and  the  whole  of  the  New 
Testament,  were  actually  Tyndale's — the  very  trans- 
lation which  had  been  all  along  denounced ;  the  rest 
was  Coverdale's,  only  subjected  to  some  revision. 
The  name  Thomas  Matthew  itself  was  apparently  an 
alias  of  John  Rogers,  who  became  the  first  of  the 
long  catalogue  of  martyrs  under  Queen  Mary.  And 
yet  the  part  taken  by  Rogers  was  not  that  of  a  trans- 
lator, but  only  a  reviser  and  annotator  of  the  work 
of  others.  He  had  been  chaplain  to  the  Merchants 
Adventurers  at  Antwerp,  where  he  had  been  familiar 
with  Tyndale ;  and  it  was  there,  no  doubt,  after  Tyn- 
dale's death,  that  he  got  printed  ofi"  the  first  part  of 
this  composite  Bible  as  far  as  the  beginning  of  Isaiah. 
From  this  point  the  printing  was  continued  by  Richard 

1  Foxe,  himself,  is  wonderfully  candid  on  this  subject,  for  he  tells  us  (v. 
410) :  "In  the  translation  of  this  Bible  the  greatest  doer  was  indeed  William 
Tyndale,  who  with  the  help  of  Miles  Coverdale,  had  translated  all  the  books 
thereof,  except  only  the  Apocrypha,  and  certain  notes  in  the  margin,  which 
were  added  after.  But  because  the  said  William  Tyndale,  in  the  mean- 
time, was  apprehended  before  this  Bible  was  fully  perfected,  it  was  thought 
good  to  them  that  had  the  doing  thereof  to  change  the  name  of  William 
Tyndale,  because  that  name  was  odious,  and  to  father  it  by  a  strange  name 
of  Thomas  Matthewe  ;  John  Rogers,  at  the  same  time,  being  corrector  to  the 
print,  who  had  then  translated  the  residue  of  the  Apocrypha,  and  added 
also  certain  notes  thereto  in  the  margin  ;  and  thereof  came  it  to  be  called 
' Thomas  Matthewes  Bible.'"  Foxe  here  overestimates  the  amount  of  the 
work  done  by  Tyndale,  and  is  wrong  in  saying  that  Coverdale  co-operated 
with  him  in  the  translation,  the  truth  being  that  what  was  not  Tyndale's  in 
this  version  was  supplemented  from  Coverdale's.  But  he  is  certainly  right 
in  saying  that  the  name  of  Thomas  Matthew  was  a  mere  blind,  to  cheat  the 
public,  and,  if  possible,  even  the  bishops,  with  the  acceptance  of  Tyndale's 
work. 


282   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Grafton,  a  member  of  the  Grocers'  Company  of  London, 
and  his  partner,  Edward  Whitchurch,^  the  half-printed 
work  having  been,  no  doubt,  smuggled  into  England 
by  the  agency  of  the  Merchants  Adventurers.  The 
printing  was  completed  in  secret,  and  the  work  was 
not  referred  either  to  the  bishops  or  to  Convocation. 
But  the  Archbishop's  approval  shut  the  mouths  of  all 
objectors,  and  while  Cromwell  reigned,  at  least,  no  one 
ventured  to  criticise  the  shortcomings  of  the  book. 

In  expressing  his  thanks  to  Cromwell  for  obtaining 
the  King's  licence  for  the  free  sale  of  the  work, 
Cranmer  wrote,  "  You  have  showed  me  more  pleasure 
herein  than  if  you  had  given  me  a  thousand  pound."  ^ 
But  Grafton,  the  printer,  writing  to  Cromwell  shortly 
afterwards,  was  naturally  still  more  interested.  In 
asking  his  acceptance  of  six  copies  of  the  book  as  a 
present,  he  said  it  was  for  his  "  most  godly  pains,  for 
which  the  Heavenly  Father  is  bound,  even  of  His 
justice,  to  reward  you  with  the  everlasting  Kingdom 
of  God."  Such  incense  was  not  too  gross  to  be  offered 
to  the  all-powerful  minister,  especially  when  the 
writer  had  a  practical  object  in  respect  of  his  own 
interests.  In  spite  of  what  Cromwell  had  done, 
there  were  some,  it  seemed,  who  would  not  believe 
the  King  meant  to  authorise  the  publication,  and  he 
begged  that  it  might  be  licensed  under  the  Privy 
Seal,  of  which  Cromwell  was  the  Keeper.  As  this 
was  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Lord's  Word,  no  doubt 
Cromwell  would  be  earnest  therein,  and  Archbishop 
Cranmer  and  Bishops  Latimer  and  Shaxton  would 
also  thank  him.^  Cromwell,  however,  did  not  think 
the  Privy  Seal  authorisation  necessary,  and  Grafton 
wrote  to  him  next,  desiring  him  to  consider  the  great 
expense  he  had  incurred.  For  he  had  printed  1500 
complete  copies,  and  it  had  cost  him  over  £500 ;  and 

^  Anderson's  Annals,  i.  568-9  ;  Chester's  Rogers,  p.  29. 

-  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  512 ;   Craumer's  Remains  (Parker  Soc. ),  PP-  345-6. 

^  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  593  ;  Cranmer's  Remains,  ib. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        283 

now  that  the  work  was  commended,  other  printers 
were  going  to  reissue  it  in  cheaper  editions  in  a 
smaller  type.  It  was  pure  covetousness  on  their 
part,  and  they  would  be  sure  to  falsify  the  text,  for 
they  did  not  seek  to  set  it  out  ''  for  God's  glory." 
Some  Dutchmen  dwelling  in  England,  who  could 
neither  speak  nor  write  good  English,  were  actually 
going  to  undertake  the  printing,  and  would  not  give 
£20  or  £40  to  a  learned  man  to  see  it  well  done. 
But,  in  truth,  if  any  other  printed  it  before  he  had 
sold  his  copies  (which,  he  believed,  would  take  three 
years  at  least),  Grafton  considered  himself  utterly 
undone.  So  he  begged  that  he  might  either  have 
the  sole  privilege  meanwhile,  or  else,  as  an  excellent 
means  to  take  away  "  blindness  and  superstition," 
that  Cromwell  would  command,  in  the  King's  name, 
that  every  beneficed  clergyman  should  procure  a  copy,  How 
"that  they  may  learn  to  know  God  and  to  instruct  deg^^redthe 
their  parishioners."  Also  that  every  abbey  should  sale  to  be 
procure  six,  to  be  laid  in  six  several  places  for  the  p"^*^^*^- 
use  of  the  convent  and  visitors  (at  this  time  the 
larger  abbeys  still  remained,  though  the  smaller  had 
been  suppressed).  "  Yea,"  he  adds,  "  I  would  none 
other  but  they  of  the  papistical  sort  should  be  com- 
pelled to  have  them,  and  then  I  know  there  should 
be  enough  found  in  my  lord  of  London's  diocese  to 
spend  away  a  great  part  of  them ;  and  so  should  this 
be  a  godly  act  worthy  to  be  had  in  remembrance 
while  the  world  doth  stand."  ^ 

This  combination  of  oily  hypocrisy  and  self-interest 
was  addressed  to  a  minister  who  understood  busi- 
ness. Indeed,  we  have  seen  already  that  in  1536 
Cromwell  himself  had  thought  of  compelling  every 
parish  clergyman  to  purchase  a  copy  of  Coverdale's 
translation,  and  though  he  forbore  to  carry  out  the 
idea  at  that  time,  the  same  policy  was  revived  two 
years  later,  that  is  to  say,  in  September  1538,  the 

^  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  App.  35  ;  Strype's  Cranmer,  App.  xx. 


284  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

year  after  Grafton  had  thus  written  to  him.     In  the 
injunctions  of  that  date  we  read  as  follows  : — 

Item,  that  you  shall  provide,  on  this  side  the  feast  of 
Easter  next  coming,  one  book  of  the  whole  Bible  of  the 
largest  volume,  in  English,  and  the  same  set  up  in  some  con- 
venient place  within  the  said  church  that  you  have  cure  of, 
where  as  your  parishioners  may  most  commodiously  resort  to 
the  same  and  read  it ;  the  charges  of  which  book  shall  be 
rateably  borne  between  you,  the  parson,  and  the  parishioners 
aforesaid,  that  is  to  say,  the  one-half  by  you  and  the  other 
half  by  them. 

Item,  that  you  shall  discourage  no  man,  privily  or 
apertly,  from  the  reading  or  hearing  of  the  said  Bible,  but 
shall  expressly  provoke,  stir,  and  exhort  every  person  to  read 
the  same  as  that  which  is  the  very  lively  word  of  God  that 
every  Christian  man  is  bound  to  embrace,  believe  and  follow 
if  he  look  to  be  saved ;  admonishing  them,  nevertheless,  to 
avoid  all  contention  and  altercation  therein,  and  to  use  an 
honest  sobriety  in  the  inquisition  of  the  true  sense  of  the 
same,  and  refer  the  explication  of  obscure  places  to  men  of 
higher  judgment  in  Scripture. 

Injunctions  like  these  may  seem  very  plausible  as 
a  means  of  promoting  general  knowledge  of  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  but  they  were  absolutely  at  variance  with  the 
methods  by  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Church  had 
hitherto  sought  to  guard  the  special  sanctity  of  Holy 
Writ  from  careless  interpretations  and  profane  and 
vulgar  use.  The  latter  clauses,  indeed,  containing  an 
admonition  to  avoid  altercations  and  to  use  "  sobriety," 
were  added  apparently  merely  to  meet  objections  on 
the  score  of  decency.  Parsons  were  to  be  compelled 
to  place  Bibles  in  their  churches  and  bear  half  the 
expense  of  doing  so,  in  order  that  the  exposition 
of  Scripture  might  be,  as  much  as  possible,  taken 
out  of  their  hands,  so  as  to  please  men  of  the  new 
school.  Of  course  a  great  many  parsons  considered 
obedience  to  such  an  injunction,  not  as  a  duty,  but 
as  a  violation  of  duty,  and  obedience,  consequently, 
could  not  be  pressed  effectually. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        285 

But  before  these  latter  injunctions  were  issued 
Cromwell's  thoughts  had  taken  a  wider  range,  and  he 
had  determined  to  employ  both  Grafton  and  Coverdale 
on  a  more  luxurious  work.  In  fact,  they  were  both 
engaged  upon  it  at  that  very  time  in  Paris,  where  the  The  "Great 
"  Bible  of  the  largest  volume  "  was  even  then  passing  ^^ll^'^  ^t 
through  the  press  under  their  supervision  and  that  of  Paris. 
William  Gray,  the  ballad-maker  who  had  contributed 
so  much  ribald  verse  to  the  great  cause  of  putting 
down  superstition.  Grafton's  fears  of  being  under- 
sold were  doubtless  easily  dissipated.  Cromwell's 
authority  would  have  checked  that  without  any 
special  ordinance.  Except  a  revision  of  Matthew's 
Bible  by  Richard  Taverner,  who  had  been  one  of  the 
"New  Learning"  canons  in  Wolsey's  College  at 
Oxford,  there  seems  to  have  been  no  reprinting  of 
that  work  by  other  printers,  and  Taverner's  was 
virtually  a  different  Bible,  favoured  by  authority 
and  dedicated  to  the  King.  Its  influence,  indeed, 
though  published  in  two  editions,  folio  and  quarto, 
was  but  slight  and  transient.  Such  emendations  as 
it  introduced,  though  made  by  a  competent  Greek 
scholar,  were  sometimes  whimsical,  and  were  not 
followed  in  subsequent  translations.  The  book,  in 
short,  very  soon  became,  what  it  remains  to  this  day, 
a  mere  curiosity.  But  Matthew's  Bible  kept  its  place 
and  became  the  basis  of  all  further  authoritative 
editions ;  and  Coverdale  was  now  seeing  what  was 
afterwards  known  as  "  the  Great  Bible  "  through  the 
press  at  Paris,  where  finer  paper  could  be  had,  and 
where  the  art  of  printing  had  been  carried  to  greater 
perfection  than  in  England.  A  licence  had  been 
obtained  from  Francis  I.^  not  only  to  print  the  work 
but  to  convey  the  printed  copies  into  England,  with 
merely  a  saving  clause  that  the  printers  should  do 
their  work  honestly,  without  making  it  the  vehicle  of 
private  or  illegitimate  opinions.     A  more  unqualified 

^  L.  p.,  XIII.  ii.  973.     See  the  text  in  Strype's  Cranmer,  App.  No.  xxx. 


286  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

licence  could  not  have  been  expected  in  that  day  in 
any  Christian  country. 

Francis,  no  doubt,  was  willing  to  oblige  Henry, 
even  by  protecting  his  agents  against  the  Inquisition 
to  some  extent,  if  he  could  only  have  done  so  decently. 
But  he  could  not  have  done  more  in  this  case  without 
recognising  and  protecting  what  was  accounted  heresy. 
So  Coverdale  and  Grafton  had  not  long  got  to  work 
before  they  were  threatened  with  interference ;  ^  but 
they  remained  unmolested  for  nearly  six  months  more. 
They  were  complained  of,  however,  by  Englishmen  at 
Paris.  In  the  middle  of  December  they  confided  as 
much  of  the  work  as  was  then  ready  to  Bonner,  at 
that  time  Bishop  of  Hereford  and  ambassador  in 
France,  to  be  conveyed  into  England.^  Four  days 
later  a  second  citation  (we  do  not  know  the  date  of 
the  first)  was  out  against  them  and  Francis  Regnault, 
the  bookseller  under  whom  they  worked.^  Coverdale 
and  Grafton  escaped  from  Paris,  leaving  behind  them 
the  copies  still  remaining,  which  were  to  be  destroyed 
in  the  Place  Maulbert.  Foxe  says  the  number  was 
2500,  which  perhaps  was  the  whole  impression,  and 
Bonner  had  certainly  been  able  to  get  a  good  number 
sent  ofi".  But  they  recovered  "  four  great  dry  fats  of 
them  "  by  purchase  afterwards  from  a  haberdasher  to 
whom  "  the  lieutenant-criminal,"  in  his  covetousness, 
had  sold  this  quantity."*  As  for  the  rest,  neither 
Bonner's  remonstrances,  which  were  very  earnest,  nor 
Cromwell's  own  complaints  on  the  matter  to  the  French 
ambassador  Marillac,  seem  to  have  had  much  effect.^ 
The  work,  however,  was  completed  in  England  in 
April,  for  means  were  found  to  get  away  from  Paris 
the  printing  presses,  types,  and  even  workmen ;  and  a 
copy  on  vellum  is  now  in  St.  John's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, containing  the  statement  at  the  end  that  it 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  1249  (State  Papers,  i.  575).  -  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  1043. 

3  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  1085,  1086.  *  Foxe,  v.  411. 

5  L.P.,  XIV.  i.  371  (1,  2),  908  (p.  425),  934,  989,  1208. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        287 

was  "fynished  in  Apryll,  anno  1539."^  It  was  com- 
pleted in  haste  for  use  in  the  churches  as  required  by 
the  injunctions,  without  an  intended  commentary  to 
which  notes  of  reference  were  printed  throughout  the 
volume.^ 

Thus  the  "Bible  of  the  largest  volume"  was  not 
in  the  hands  of  the  public  until  more  than  half  a  year 
after  the  proclamation  which  enjoined  the  use  of  it  in 
churches ;  and  the  proclamation,  even  by  the  very 
nature  of  things,  could  not  be  generally  obeyed — as 
we  actually  know  it  was  not  even  two  years  later.^ 
But  in  that  same  month  of  April  1539  Parliament 
assembled,  and  the  King,  being  in  great  dread  of 
invasion  by  a  possible  combination  against  him  to 
give  eflfect  to  papal  excommunication,  was  intending 
"  to  extinguish  diversities  of  opinion  "  by  law,  so  as  to  The  Act 
show  himself  as  good  a  Christian  as  any  continental  ^,?^^^% 

o  ,         1         .        .  fi      1  •  diversities 

sovereign.  Even  at  the  begmning  of  the  session,  of  opinion. 
in  anticipation  of  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  the  Six 
Articles,  he  had  drawn  up  a  proclamation  to  correct 
the  abuses  which  had  sprung  up  from  such  diversities. 
These,  he  found,  had  been  fostered  by  disputes  over 
the  Scriptures,  the  use  of  which  in  English  he  had 
sanctioned :  some  arguing  from  them  in  a  manner  to 
subvert  the  sacraments,  and  others  for  the  restoration 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  of  pilgrimages,  of  idolatry, 
and  of  other  old  superstitions.  He  therefore  ordered 
that  no  one,  under  a  penalty,  should  call  another 
heretic  or  Papist  unless  he  was  prepared  to  prove  it ; 
that  none  except  beneficed  clergymen,  or  graduates 
of  Oxford  or  Cambridge,  should  be  admitted  to  preach 
or  expound  the  Bible,  and  that  none  should  read  it  in 
church  in  a  high  voice  so  as  to  create  disturbances.* 

On  the  14th  November  following,  Cromwell,  though 
he  could  get  no  reimbursement  from  France  of  the 

^  Anderson,  ii.  31,  79.  "  Westcott's  History  of  the  English  Bible. 

3  See  L.  P.,  XVI.  783,  803  (Burnet,  iv.  507). 

*  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  868.      Printed  in  Stiype,  Eccl.  Mem.  I.  ii.  434  ;  also  (but 
under  a  wrong  date)  in  Wilkins,  iii.  810-11. 


288   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

expenses  which  he  told  Marillac  he  himself  had  laid 
out  in  the  printing  of  this  Bible,  obtained  from  his 
own  King  a  commission  to  prevent  any  one  printing 
it  without  his  leave  for  five  years,  on  the  ground  that 
otherwise  it  might  lead  to  inconveniences,  "  as  when 
wilful  and  heady  folks  shall  confer  upon  the  diversity 
of  the  said  translations."  ^  Curiously  enough,  on  that 
very  day  Cranmer  had  written  to  Cromwell  about  the 
price  to  be  charged  for  the  "  Great  Bibles,"  for  which 
he  had  composed  a  Preface  and  submitted  it  to  the 
King's  judgment.  The  King's  printer,  Bartelett  (or 
Berthelet),  and  Edward  Whitchurch,  the  partner  of 
Grafton  who  was  actually  employed  on  the  work,  had 
been  with  him,  and  by  Bartelett's  advice  he  had 
arranged  that  the  volumes  should  be  sold  for  thirteen 
shillings  and  fourpence  a  piece.  But  he  understood 
from  Whitchurch  that  Cromwell  wanted  them  sold 
at  ten  shillings,  and  though  Whitchurch  thought 
this  too  low,  he  and  Grafton  were  content,  provided 
they  had  a  monopoly  of  the  sale.^ 

The  book  came  out  with  Cranmer's  Preface  in  April 
1540  ;  and  very  shortly  afterwards,  on  the  7th  May, 
we  find  John  Uvedale  writing  to  Cromwell  in  further- 
ance of  advice  which  he  had  already  given  to  him 
personally,  to  enjoin  the  bishops,  each  to  set  up  in 
his  cathedral  "  two  or  three  Bibles,  as  seemly  and 
ornately  as  they  can  deck  them,  with  seats  and  forms 
for  men  of  all  ages  to  read  and  study  on  them."  This, 
he  considered,  would  be  the  godliest  monument  they 
could  leave  in  their  churches.^  It  was  meant  to  be, 
apparently,  an  invitation  for  laymen  as  well  as  clergy- 
men to  read  and  expound  the  Scriptures  in  cathedrals 
to  separate  congregations,  occupying  seats  and  forms 
round  the  reader,  whether  the  clergy  in  charge  approved 
of  it  or  not. 

But  Cromwell  was  now  scarcely  in  a  position  to 

1  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  516  (Rymer,  xiv.  649). 
2  L.  P.,  XIV.  ii.  517  (State  Papers,  i,  589).  ^  x.  P.,  xv.  648, 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE        289 

take  such  a  step.     Although  just  made  Earl  of  Essex  cromweirs 
his  fall  was  really  impendinof :   and  he  was  doubtless  P'^^^^i*'.'^ 

1  •  t        ^7■•       )       n  precarious. 

pretty  well  aware  how  precarious  the  King  s  favour 
was.  It  was  uncertain,  indeed,  from  day  to  day 
whether  the  religious  policy  of  which  he  had  been  the 
instrument  would  be  maintained  or  reversed.  One 
morning  Sampson,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  was  desig- 
nated for  the  proposed  new  bishopric  of  Westminster. 
Two  hours  later  he  was  committed  to  the  Tower  on  a 
charge  of  treason,^  and  the  bishopric  was  afterwards 
given  to  Thirlby.  That  Sampson's  preferment  would 
have  meant  a  return  to  ancient  ways  in  many  things 
is  perfectly  certain  ;  and  no  less  certain  is  it  that  his 
arrest  meant  a  change  to  the  very  opposite  policy,  as 
Dr.  Nicholas  Wilson,  a  leading  divine  of  the  old 
school,  was  arrested  along  with  him.  And  so  the 
fitful  changes  went  on  till  Anne  of  Cleves  was  divorced 
and  Cromwell  himself  was  sacrificed.  Yet  even  then 
the  nation  was  made  fully  aware  that  there  was  to  be 
no  return  to  Popery.  For  two  days  after  Cromwell's 
execution,  while  three  Lutherans  were  burned  in 
Smithfield — Dr.  Barnes,  William  Jerome,  and  Thomas 
Garrard,  or  Garret, — three  Papists,  Abell,  Fether- 
stone,  and  Dr.  Edward  Powell,  were  butchered  at  the 
same  place  as  traitors  by  the  horrible  death  then 
awarded  for  treason. 

Luther  perfectly  understood  the  situation  when  in 
that  very  year  he  wrote,  in  reference  to  the  death  of 
Dr.  Barnes,  who  had  been  with  him  in  Germany, 
"  What  Squire  Harry  wills  must  be  an  article  of  the 
faith  for  Englishmen,  for  life  or  death."  " 

After  Cromwell's  fall,  Gardiner,  who  had  been 
excluded  from  the  Council  during  his  ascendancy, 
had  much  more  influence.  But  in  spite  of  the  Act 
and  Proclamation  of  1539,  the  question  who  was  a 

1  L.  P.,  XV.  737,  758.     That  Marillac  means  Bishop  of  Westminster  by 
"de  Valmaister"  is  certain.     See  L.  P.,  xiv.  ii.  429  (p.  152). 

2  L.  P.,  XVI.  106. 

VOL.  II  TJ 


290  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

heretic  and  who  was  a  Papist  became  more  embittered 
than  ever;  only  the  contentious  factions  discharged 
their  arrows  at  each  other  through  the  Press.  There 
A  war  of  was  a  regular  war  of  ballad-makers,  some  denouncing 
maWs.  ^^®  fallen  minister  as  a  traitor  and  rejoicing  at  his 
overthrow,  others  rebuking  the  first  set  for  want  of 
charity,  and  accusing  them  of  being  popish  and 
reactionary.  Among  the  other  poetasters  one  Thomas 
Smith,  clerk  of  the  Council  to  Queen  Katharine 
Howard,  was  bitterly  answered  by  William  Gray,  the 
ribald  versifier  who,  as  Cromwell's  underling,  had 
railed  alike  at  such  things  as  the  Rood  of  Grace  and 
at  Friar  Forest's  martyrdom.  Grafton  printed  Gray's 
ballads,  and,  to  shield  himself,  issued  them  as  "  printed 
at  London  by  Richard  Bankes."  But  Richard  Bankes 
denied  before  the  Council  that  they  had  proceeded 
from  his  press,  and  Grafton  was  compelled  to  confess 
that  he  was  the  real  printer,  not  only  of  these  effu- 
sions, but  also  of  an  English  translation  of  Melanc- 
thon's  letter  to  Henry  VHI.  remonstrating  against 
the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles.^  One  Thomas  Walpole 
had  already  been  arrested  for  seditiously  setting  forth 
this  epistle  in  reprobation  of  "  the  King's  acts  of 
Christian  religion "  ;  ^  and  the  Council  at  once  took 
pains  to  stop  its  circulation. 

Grafton  was  committed  to  the  Fleet,  as  were  also 
Thomas  Smith,  William  Gray,  and  others.  Grafton, 
however,  had  other  things  to  answer  for  as  well, 
which  were  probably  brought  against  him  after  his 
committal.  Foxe,  who  is  our  sole  authority  here,  is 
certainly  wrong  in  making  them  the  cause  of  his 
committal,  which  the  Privy  Council  records  show  to 
have  been  as  above  stated.  But  we  may  allow  Foxe 
to  state  the  matter  in  his  own  way  : — 

After  this  the  bishops,  bringing  their  purpose  to  pass, 
brought  the  lord  Cromwell  out  of  favor,  and  shortly  to  his 

1  X.  P.,  XVI.  366,  422-4.  2  x_  p,^  xvi.  349,  351,  420,  424. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        291 

death ;  and,  not  long  after,  great  complaint  was  made  to  the 
King  of  the  translation  of  the  Bible,  and  of  the  preface  of 
the  same ;  and  then  was  the  sale  of  the  Bible  commanded  to 
be  stayed,  the  bishops  promising  to  amend  and  correct  it, 
but  never  performing  the  same.  Then  Grafton  was  called, 
and  first  charged  with  the  printing  of  Matthew's  Bible ;  but 
he  being  fearful  of  trouble,  made  excuses  for  himself  in  all 
things.  Then  was  he  examined  of  the  Great  Bible,  and 
what  notes  he  was  purposed  to  make ;  to  which  he  answered 
that  he  knew  none.  For  his  purpose  was  to  have  retained 
learned  men  to  have  made  the  notes ;  but  when  he  perceived 
the  King's  Majesty  and  his  Clergy  not  willing  to  have  any, 
he  proceeded  no  further.  But,  for  all  these  excuses,  Grafton 
was  sent  to  the  Fleet,  and  there  remained  six  weeks,  and 
before  he  came  out  was  bound,  in  three  hundred  pounds,  that 
he  should  neither  sell  nor  imprint,  nor  cause  to  be  imprinted, 
any  more  bibles,  until  the  King  and  the  Clergy  should  agree 
upon  a  translation.  And  thus  was  the  Bible  from  that  time 
stayed  during  the  reign  of  King  Henry  VIII.^ 

What  is  said  here  of  the  conduct  of  the  bishops  is, 
of  course,  one-sided,  and,  moreover,  not  exactly  true. 
That  the  bishops  brought  Cromwell  out  of  favour  is 
only  a  way  of  saying  that  old  principles  were 
recovering  lost  ground,  for  Cromwell's  whole  govern- 
ment had  been  one  continual  war  upon  their 
authority,  and  consequently  on  the  peace  and  order 
of  the  Church.  This  had  served  the  King's  policy 
for  a  long  time,  but  even  he  was  not  comfortable 
about  it  now.  What  the  bishops  actually  did  about 
the  Scriptures  we  shall  see  presently.  But  there  are 
some  statements  in  the  above  extract  which  appar- 
ently require  chronological  adjustment — a  thing  not 
very  wonderful,  when  they  were  written  so  many 
years  after  the  events.  For  Grafton's  committal  to 
the  Fleet  was  on  the  4th  January  1541,  and  the 
complaints  of  the  bishops — at  least  those  which 
stand  on  record — about  the  translation  of  the  Bible 
were  made  in  Convocation  in  February  1542.  Nor 
is   it   true  that  the  Bible  was  even  from  that  date 

1  Acts  and  Monuments,  v.  413. 


292  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

"  stayed,  during  the  reign  of  Henry  VHI."  But 
though  we  have  no  actual  record  of  the  fact,  it  may 
conceivably  have  been  stayed  for  a  time  after 
Grafton's  imprisonment,  or  perhaps  even  before  that 
event,  soon  after  Cromwell's  fall ;  for  there  seems 
indirect  evidence  to  that  effect,  to  be  noticed  further 
on.  In  that  case  the  stay  may  have  been  due  to  the 
simple  action  of  the  bishops  in  their  several  dioceses, 
since  they  had  to  some  extent  recovered  their 
authority  by  Cromwell's  fall ;  and  they  were 
probably  justified  in  saying  that  the  King  no 
longer  insisted  on  the  use  of  that  English  Bible 
required  by  Cromwell's  injunctions. 

Meanwhile  we  must  take  note  of  what  was  done 
after  Grafton's  committal  to  the  Fleet.  He  does  not 
appear  to  have  lost,  except,  perhaps,  for  a  few  weeks, 
his  position  as  the  King's  printer;^  but  on  the  25th 
April  1541,  nearly  four  months  later,  the  privilege  of 
selling  the  bibles  "  of  the  great  volume  "  was  given 
to  Anthony  Marler  of  London,  merchant  (who 
apparently  had  bought  the  stock  from  Grafton),  the 
prices  which  he  was  permitted  to  charge  being  ten 
shillings  for  an  unbound  copy,  and  twelve  shillings 
for  a  bound  one  "trimmed  with  bullions."^  Marler, 
however,  required  conditions  similar  to  those  that 
Grafton  had  obtained.  On  the  1st  May  a  petition 
from  him  was  read  in  Council  for  the  issue  of  a  fresh 
Every  proclamation  requiring  that  every  church  not  yet 
church  to  provided  with  a  bible  should  procure  one  according  to 

procure  a    J^  .     .  .  .  J-  o 

bible.  the  mjunctions.  inis  was  agreed  to,  and  the  new 
proclamation  was  issued  on  the  6th,  setting  forth 
that  as  many  towns  and  parishes  had  neglected  to 
comply  with  the  King's  injunctions  in  this  matter, 
they  were  required  to  supply  the  books  by  All  Saints' 
Day  following,   upon   penalty  of  forty  shillings  for 

^  His  name  actually  appears  in  conjunction  with  that  of  Whitchurch  on 
the  proclamation  of  6th  May  1541.  See  Ames's  Typographical  Antiquities, 
by  Herbert  and  Dibdin,  iii.  444. 

2  L.  P.,  XVI.  756.  ^  L.  P.,  XVI.  783. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE       293 

every  month's  further  delay.  It  was  also  declared 
that  the  King  intended  these  bibles  to  be  read  humbly 
and  reverently.  People  were  not  to  read  them  aloud 
in  time  of  mass  or  other  divine  service,  and,  if 
laymen,  they  were  not  to  argue  thereupon.^ 

Of  the  effect  of  this  proclamation  it  may  be  well 
to  read  what  the  French  ambassador,  Marillac,  says  in 
writing  to  his  own  sovereign,  Francis  L,  on  the  11th 
May  1541,  just  five  days  after  it  was  issued: — 

What  they  are  now  in  the  way  to  do  is  to  make  new 
ordinances  and  decrees  in  matters  of  religion ;  wherein  they 
change  purposes  so  often  that  I  cannot  well  think  what  will 
be  the  end  of  it  all,  as  last  year  they  put  to  death  those  whom 
they  had  used  as  instruments  to  put  out  the  monks  and  apply 
the  revenue  of  their  foundations  to  this  King's  profit.  Several 
decrees  were  also  made  about  bibles  in  their  vernacvdar 
speech  which  they  keep  in  all  the  churches,  in  such  wise 
that  the  people  dare  no  longer  read  them.  Now  within 
these  eight  days  they  have  made  a  contrary  decree,  giving 
permission  to  read  the  said  bibles,  which  a  few  days  before 
they  wanted  to  take  away  entirely,  with  a  very  express  com- 
mandment to  all  the  bishops  and  their  commissaries  to 
preach  to  the  people  purely  and  simply  the  text  of  the  bible 
without  admitting  any  opinion  of  doctors.  Which  thing, 
Sire,  one  knows  not  how  to  interpret,  whether  it  be  to 
discover  thereby  those  who  have  any  opinion  contrary  to 
what  has  been  ordered,  or  if  it  be  to  enter  further  than 
ever  into  the  new  doctrines  of  the  Germans.^ 

The  struggle  was  evidently  still  going  on  between 
the  bishops  and  the  innovators,  and  if  the  former  had 
succeeded  for  a  while  they  were  depressed  again. 
Vested  interests  were  evidently  against  them.  Marler 
must  sell  his  bibles  some  way,  just  as  Grafton  had 
done ;  and  he  had  now  got  compulsory  powers  to 
force  the  sale.  But  the  bishops,  who  had  no  longer 
a  Cromwell  riding  rough-shod  over  them,  might  hope 
to  plead  their  cause  with  the  King  himself,  who  was 

1  L.  P.,  XVI.  803,  819. 

'^  Kaulek,  Corresp.  ■politique  de  MM.  dc  Castillon  ft  de  Marillac,  pp.  301- 
302. 


294  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

really  both  a  reasonable  and  a  very  judicious  sovereign 
in  all  that  did  not  affect  his  own  particular  interests ; 
and  no  doubt  both  Gardiner  and  other  members  of 
the  episcopate  had  been  making  representations  to 
him  on  the  subject  of  these  different  bibles,  which 
were,  one  and  all  of  them,  as  they  considered, 
corrupt,  and  calculated  to  do  much  mischief  among 
the  people.  In  fact,  we  know  from  Foxe  himself 
that  the  very  first  of  them,  Matthew's  Bible,  with 
which  Cranmer  was  so  greatly  pleased,  had  appeared 
to  them  exceedingly  objectionable,  and  Foxe  himself 
shall  tell  us  why  : — 

The  setting  forth  of  this  book  did  not  a  little  offend  the 
clergy,  namely  the  bishops  aforesaid,  both  for  the  prologues, 
and  especially  because  in  the  same  book  was  one  special 
table  collected  of  the  common  places  in  the  Bible,  and  the 
Scriptures  for  the  approbation  of  the  same ;  and  chiefly 
about  the  supper  of  the  Lord,  and  marriage  of  priests,  and 
the  mass,  which  there  was  said  not  to  be  found  in  the 
Scripture.^ 

A  few  extracts  from  this  "  table  of  common 
Offensive  placcs  "  will  perhaps  assist  the  reader  to  understand 
character  ^j^y.  ^^^  book  sccmcd  SO  objcctionablc.  The  subjects 
Matthew's  are  arranged  alphabetically,  and  the  first  article  is 
Bible.        u  Abhomynacyon,"  under  which  we  read  : — 

Abhomynacyon  before  God  are  idoles  and  images  before 
whom  the  people  do  bow  themselves. 

This,  of  course,  was  intended  as  a  direct  rebuke  to 
the  time-honoured  mode  of  worship  observed  in  all 
the  churches  in  the  land. 

Abuses. — The  abuses  that  be  in  the  Churche  ought  to  be 
corrected  by  the  Prynces. 

Cursynge. — God  doth  curse  the  blessynges  of  the  preastes 
and  blesseth  their  curssyngz.     Mala.  ii.  a. 

And,  to  come  to  the  special  examples  pointed  at 
by  Foxe  himself: — 

1  Acts  and  Monuments,  v.  412. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE       295 

Maryage. — Maryage  is  institute  of  God,  gen.  ij.  d ;  fro 
which  none  shulde  be  refused,  for  to  avoyed  fornycacyon 
j  Cor.  vij.  a ;  for  it  is  honorable.  Hebre  xiij.  a ;  the  prayse 
wherof  is  Prover  xviij.  (^.  The  forbyddinge  of  mariage 
then  is  the  doctryne  of  dyuels.    j  Tim.  a. 

3fasse. — The  worde  masse  is  not  in  the  Byble,  translated 
by  S.  Jerom,  nor  in  none  other  that  we  have.  And  therfore 
could  I  not  tell  what  to  note  therof,  but  to  sende  the 
reader  to  the  Souper  of  our  Lorde  Jesus  Christ,  i  Corin.  xi. 
Act.  XX.  h,  c. 

Supper. — The  supper  of  oar  Lord  is  a  holy  memorye  & 
geuyng  of  thankes  for  the  deth  of  Christ.  Mat.  xxvj.  c. 
]\Iar.  xiiij.  c.     Luke  xxij.     i  Cor.  xi.  e,  x.  d. 

Is  it  extraordinary  that,  however  Cranmer  may 
have  been  pleased  with  it,  the  bishops  generally 
objected  to  a  Bible  being  thrust  upon  them  contain- 
ing prefatory  matter  of  this  description?  How 
could  those  who  had  taken  vows  of  celibacy,  and 
considered  them  sacred,  have  allowed  their  people  to 
read,  even  in  their  very  churches,  that  what  was 
called  the  "  forbidding  of  marriage  "  was  the  doctrine 
of  devils  ?  Or  how  could  honest  clergy  of  the  old  school 
have  tolerated  statements  suggesting  that  the  mass 
was  not  authorised  by  the  Bible,  and  that  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  only  a  memorial  and  giving  of  thanks  ? 
In  spite  of  Cranmer's  approbation  of  the  book,  the 
objections  raised  by  the  bishops  evidently  had  some 
effect,  for  the  Great  Bible  of  1539  had  no  such  offen- 
sive "  table  of  common  places,"  nor  the  Bible  of  1 540 
either,  to  which  Cranmer  supplied  a  Preface.  But 
the  translation  itself  did  not  please  them,  and 
when  Convocation  met  in  the  beginning  of  1542 
a  thorough  examination  of  the  whole  book  was 
called  for.  The  King  knew  what  was  said  about 
it,  and  on  the  27th  January  Cranmer  himself  con- 
veyed to  the  assembled  clergy  and  prelates  a  royal 
message  desiring  them  to  consult  among  them- 
selves what  things  needed  reformation,  as  there  was 
no  doubt  that  there  was  much  that  required  correc- 


tiOD 


296  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

tion  in  the  Englisli  Bible,  both  in  the  Old  and  in  the 
New  Testament.  On  the  3rd  February  the  message 
was  taken  into  consideration,  and  the  Archbishop 
asked  every  one  separately  whether  they  could,  with- 
out scandal  and  open  offence  to  faithful  souls,  retain 
the  Great  Bible  as  translated  in  English.  The 
The  Great  majority  declared  that  it  could  not  be  retained 
deSnedTy  without  carcful  revisiou  and  comparison  with  the 
Convoca-  Vulgatc,  and  some  other  matters  were  put  aside  till 
this  could  be  discussed.  On  the  13th,  after  a  con- 
ference between  the  Houses  about  the  mode  of 
procedure,  the  Prolocutor  of  the  Lower  House 
entered  the  Upper  House  and  presented  a  book  of 
annotations  made  by  the  clergy,  which  he  submitted 
to  the  judgment  of  the  bishops.  Select  committees 
of  the  divines  of  both  Houses  were  appointed  to 
examine  the  New  Testament  and  the  Old ;  and  on 
the  17th,  when  the  Prolocutor  again  appeared  in 
the  Upper  House,  Gardiner  read  out  a  list  of 
Latin  words  and  phrases  ^  which,  on  account  of  their 

^  These  were  :  "  Ecclesia,  p.enitentia,  pontifex,  ancilla,  contritus,  olocausta, 
justitia,  justiticare,  idiota,  elementa,  baptizare,  martyr,  adorare,  dignus,  san- 
dalium,  simplex,  tetrarcha,  sacramentum,  siniulachrum,  gloria,  coniiictationes, 
ceremonia,  mysterium,  religio,  Spiritus  Sanctus,  spiritus,  merces,  Contiteor 
tibi  Pater,  Panis  propositionis,  communio,  perseverare,  dilectus,  sapieutia, 
pietas,  presbyter,  lites,  servus,  opera,  sacrificium,  benedictio,  humilis,  humi- 
litas,  scientia,  Gentilis,  synagoga,  ejicere,  misericordia,  complacui,  inci-epare, 
distribueretur,  orbis,  inculpatus,  senior,  Apocalypsis,  satisfactio,  contentio, 
conscientia,  peccatum,  peccator,  idolum,  prudentia,  prudenter,  parabola, 
magnifico,  Oriens,  subditus,  didragma,  hospitalitas,  episcopus,  gratia,  charitas, 
tyrannus,  eoncupiscentia,  cisera,  Apostolus,  Apostolatus,  egenus,  stater, 
societas,  zizania,  Christus,  conversari,  profiteor,  impositio  manuum,  idolo- 
latria,  Dominus,  Sauctus,  confessio,  imitator,  Pascha,  innumerabilis,  inen- 
arrabilis,  infidelis,  paganus,  commilito,  virtutes,  dominationes,  throni, 
potestates,  hostia."  The  list  was  copied  by  Fuller  froni  the  records  of 
Convocation,  which  are  now  lost,  with  the  note,  "  Take  faults  and  all,  as  iu 
the  original."  It  contains,  certainly,  as  Fuller  copied  it,  several  manifest 
errors,  which  are  partly  corrected  by  Wilkins,  whose  corrections  I  have 
followed  for  the  most  part.  But  apparently  some  errors  remain,  e.g. 
"distribueretur  orbis"  (a  single  phrase  wrongly  treated  as  two  separate 
words  in  AVilkius)  seems  to  be  a  misreading  of  distribueretur fabris  in  4  (-) 
Kings  xxii.  9,  where  the  English  translation  is  really  not  quite  so  clear  as  the 
Latin.  It  is  curious  that  when  two  accidental  repetitions,  conflidationcs  and 
mysterium  have  been  struck  out  of  the  list  printed  by  Fuller,  the  number  of 
the  words  and  separate  headings  handed  in  by  Gardiner  appears  to  have  been 
exactly  one'hundred. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE       297 

special  significance,  he  wished  to  see  retained,  as  far 
as  possible,  in  their  Latin  form,  or  rendered  into 
English  as  suitable  as  could  be  found, — meaning, 
apparently,  by  words  etymologically  similar/  His 
object,  manifestly,  was  to  maintain  reverence  for  the 
sacred  text,  even  at  the  cost  of  leaving  it,  possibly,  a 
little  mysterious  at  times.  But  it  was  the  object  of 
an  opposite  school  to  popularise  the  Scripture,  even 
at  the  almost  certain  cost  of  many  misapprehen- 
sions ;  and  that  opposite  school  carried  the  day.  It 
is  true  that  an  English  Bible  was  not  yet  in  every- 
body's hands,  and,  as  it  was  soon  felt,  some  abuses 
required  to  be  checked.  But  the  movement  to  popu- 
larise the  language  of  Scripture,  and,  so  far  as  may 
be,  the  deep  thoughts  of  Scripture,  has  never  abated 
from  that  day  to  this.  It  has,  of  course,  given  rise 
to  much  crude  thinking,  and  even  to  a  great  deal  of 
misapplied  scholarship.  But  it  is  better  in  every 
way  that  there  should  be  no  cause  of  suspicion  given 
to  the  multitude  of  anything  that  savours  of  an 
attempt  to  shut  the  gates  of  knowledge  to  the 
unlearned. 

Yet  Gardiner's  protest  in  favour  of  preserving  the 
Latin  form  of  certain  words  was  by  no  means  uncalled 
for.  It  was  doubtless  framed  with  a  view  to  the 
recognition  of  certain  general  principles  of  translation 
rather  than  to  impugn  any  particular  terms  used  in 
the  Great  Bible.  In  fact,  the  Great  Bible  itself  had 
conformed  to  Gardiner's  principle  in  many  things 
where  Wycliffe's  and  Coverdale's  Bibles  had  adopted 
more  familiar  expressions — as  in  the  use  of  the  word 
"  regeneration,"  where  WyclifFe  had  translated  it 
"again  begetting,"  and  Coverdale  and  "Matthew" 
"  the  new  birth."  So  also  Wycliffe  had  made  Re- 
deemer "  again     buyer,"    and     Resurrection  "  rising 

^  "Publice  legebat  verba  Latina  in  sacro  voluniine  contenta,  quae  voluit 
pro  eorum  germane  et  native  intellectu  et  rei  majestate,  quoad  poterit  vel  in 
sua  natura  retiiieri,  vel,  quam  accommodatissime  fieri  possit,  in  Anglicum 
sermonem  verti." 


298   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

again."  And  though  it  may  be  that  no  one  desired 
to  revive  antiquated  language,  there  was  no  less 
objection  felt  to  mere  commonplace  phraseology.  It 
would  doubtless  have  been  a  shock,  even  to  that 
generation,  to  have  reproduced  WyclifFe's  version  of 
our  Lord's  words  in  John  xx.  17 — "  I  have  not  yet 
styed  to  my  Father." 

But  while  the  Old  and  New  Testament  committees 
were  pursuing  their  work,  although  it  could  not  have 
been  left  in  more  competent  hands — for  the  men  who 
served  on  them  were  undoubtedly  the  best  Greek  and 
Hebrew  scholars  then  in  England, — a  new  royal 
message  came  to  the  Houses,  delivered  through 
Granmer  as  before.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  Cranmer 
himself  was  a  not  unwilling  counsellor  in  this,  though 
the  main  object,  doubtless,  was  to  satisfy  vested 
The  interests.  The  message  was  to  the  effect  that  Con- 
vocation were  to  proceed  no  further  in  the  matter,  as 
the  King  proposed  to  refer  the  translation  of  the 
Bible  to  the  two  Universities.  The  bishops  not 
unnaturally  resented  this,  and  with  only  three 
exceptions  (namely,  Cranmer,  Goodrich  of  Ely,  and 
Barlow  of  St.  David's)  united  in  protesting  that 
the  business  was  one  which  was  far  more  suitable  to 
the  Synod  than  to  the  Universities.^  But  Cranmer 
had  the  King's  orders,  and  the  work  was  put  aside. ^ 
The  real  object  was  simply  to  stop  the  business  of 
revision  altogether,  for  two  days  later  (on  the  12th 
March)  Anthony  Marler  obtained  a  patent  giving 
him  sole  authority  to  print  the  Bible  during  the  next 
four  years. ^ 

In    short,    the   combined   work   of  Tyndale    and 
Coverdale  was  actually  forced   upon   the  clergy  in 

^  According  to  Fuller,  who  had  seen  the  original  records  of  Convocation, 
the  bishops  affirmed  that  "  the  universities  were  much  decayed  of  late, 
wherein  all  things  were  carried  by  young  men,  whose  judgments  were  not  to 
be  relied  on,  so  that  the  learning  of  the  land  was  chiefly  in  this  Convocation  " 
[Church  History,  ed.  Brewer,  iii.  201). 

2  Wilkins,  iii.  860-2.  ^  l   p^  xvii.  45  (Rymer,  xiv.  745). 


revision 
stopped 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH  BIBLE       299 

spite  of  all  remonstrances.  They  had  positively  con- 
demned the  book  in  Convocation  as  unfit  to  be  used 
without  very  large  revision,  and  they  were  proceeding 
to  revise  it/  even  in  obedience  to  the  King's  own 
message,  when  they  were  stopped  and  told  to  forbear 
on  a  pretext  which  was  a  positive  falsehood.  The  sale 
of  the  faulty  work  was  simply  to  be  forced  on  as  before. 
The  government  of  the  Church  was  absolutely  para- 
lysed, and  there  was  nothing  left  for  bishops  or  clergy 
but  to  pursue  the  policy  of  the  importunate  widow, 
who  had  her  just  claims  listened  to  at  length  by  the 
judge  who  feared  not  God,  neither  regarded  man.^ 

The  large  bibles  which  had  been  set  up  in  churches 
were  certainly  not  an  unmixed  blessing  to  the  people. 
Seats  and  forms  may  not  have  been  provided  to  hear 
them  read,  as  Uvedale  had  suggested  to  Cromwell;  but 
we  have  seen  already  that  disputes  over  the  Scrip- 
tures had  been  seriously  animadverted  on  by  the  King 
himself,  and  that  among  other  provisions  against 
abuses  it  was  strictly  forbidden  to  read  those  bibles 
with  a  high  voice  so  as  to  create  disturbances.  As 
this  was  forbidden  by  proclamation,  we  may  not 
unreasonably  suspect  that  it  had  been  already  prac- 
tised ;  and  the  fact  that  it  was  so  comes  out  very 
distinctly  from  the  words  of  one  who  considered  the 
practice  praiseworthy.  In  accordance  with  the  in- 
junctions. Bishop  Bonner  had  placed  six  large  bibles 
in  St.  Paul's ;  and  this  is  how  Foxe  tells  us  that  they 
were  used : — 

The  Bibles  thus  standing  in  Paul's,  by  the  commandment 
of  the  King  and  the  appointment  of  Bonner  the  bishop,  many 

^  Drs.  Wotton  and  Leighton  had  laid  before  Gardiner  in  Convocation  a 
translation  made  by  themselves  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  in 
the  session  to  which  the  royal  message  was  announced.  (Wilkins,  iii.  862.) 
The  Dr.  Leighton  here  mentioned  seems  to  have  been  Dr.  Edward  Leighton, 
who  later  in  this  year  was  made  a  prebendary  of  the  new  foundation  at 
Westminster. 

"^  Just  before  this,  on  the  14th  February,  the  bishops  in  this  Synod  had 
urged  a  supplication  to  the  King  that  the  public  plays  and  comedies  which 
were  acted  in  London  "  in  great  dishonor  and  contempt  of  the  word  of  God  " 
should  be  corrected. 


300  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

well  disposed  people  used  much  to  resort  to  the  hearing 
thereof,  especially  when  they  could  get  any  that  had  an  audible 
voice  to  read  unto  them,  misdoubting  therein  no  danger 
towards  them ;  and  no  more  there  was,  so  long  as  the  days 
of  Cromwell  lasted.  After  he  was  gone,  it  happened  amongst 
divers  and  sundry  godly-disposed  persons  which  frequented 
John  therein  the  reading  of  the  aforesaid  Bible,  that  one  John 
Porter's  Porter  used  sometimes  to  be  occupied  in  that  godly  exercise, 
to  the  edifying  as  well  of  himself  as  of  other.  This  Porter 
was  a  fresh  young  man  and  of  a  big  stature ;  who  by  diligent 
reading  of  the  Scripture,  and  by  hearing  of  such  sermons  as 
then  were  preached  by  them  that  were  setters-forth  of  God's 
truth,  became  very  expert.  The  Bible  being  then  set  up  by 
Bonner's  commandment,  upon  divers  pillars  in  Paul's  church, 
fixed  unto  the  same  with  chains  for  all  men  to  read  in  them 
that  would,  great  midtitudes  would  resort  thither  to  hear  this 
Porter,  because  he  could  read  well,  and  had  an  audible  voice. 
Bonner  and  his  chaplain  being  grieved  withal  (and  the  world 
beginning  then  to  frown  upon  the  gospellers)  sent  for  the 
said  Porter,  and  rebuked  him  very  sharply  for  his  reading. 
But  Porter  answered  him  that  he  trusted  he  had  done 
nothing  contrary  to  the  law,  neither  contrary  to  his  adver- 
tisements, which  he  had  fixed  in  print  over  every  Bible.^ 

We  are  then  informed  that  the  Bishop  charged  him 
with  making  expositions  upon  the  text  (which  laymen 
had  been  forbidden  to  do)  and  gathering  multitudes 
about  him  to  make  tumults.  "  He  answered,  he 
trusted  that  should  not  be  proved  by  him,"  though 
what  else  we  are  to  infer  does  not  appear.  The 
Bishop  sent  him  to  Newgate  prison,  where  it  appears 
he  severely  expiated  his  offence.  "  He  was  miserably 
fettered  in  irons,  both  legs  and  arms,  wdth  a  collar 
of  iron  about  his  neck  fastened  to  the  wall  in  the 
dungeon,"  and  when  a  kinsman  got  him  released 
from  this  painful  constraint,  he  was  placed  among 
prisoners  committed  for  felony  and  murder  : — 

Where  Porter,  being  amongst  them,  hearing  and  seeing 
their  wickedness  and  blasphemy,  exhorted  them  to  amend- 
ment of  life,  and  gave  unto  them  such  instructions  as  he  had 

1  Foxe,  A.  and  M.  v.  451-2. 


cH.i        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE        301 

learned  of  the  Scriptures;  for  which  his  so  doing  he  was 
complained  on,  and  so  carried  down,  and  laid  in  the  lower 
dungeon  of  all,  oppressed  with  bolts  and  irons,  where,  within 
six  or  eight  days  after,  he  was  found  dead. 

It  seems  only  right  thus  to  give  the  conclusion  of 
the  story  from  the  only  authority  from  which  we 
know  anything  of  the  case  at  all.  But  though  the 
harshness  and  cruelty  of  prison  treatment  in  that  age 
is  indisputable,  we  can  hardly  persuade  ourselves  that 
there  was  nothing  more  in  the  case  of  this  man  of 
lawless  piety  and  noisy  Bible -reading  than  Foxe 
chooses  to  let  us  know. 

How  much  disorder  in  connection  with  Bible- 
reading  took  place  under  Cromwell's  protection  we 
are  left  to  imagine  for  ourselves.  Porter's  case 
occurred  in  1541,  the  year  after  his  death,  and  the 
effort  of  Convocation  to  get  the  Great  Bible  amended 
was  in  the  early  part  of  1542.  The  clergy  were 
snubbed ;  but  next  year  the  abuse  of  noisy  readings 
came  under  the  cognisance  of  Parliament.  An  Act 
was  passed  "  for  the  advancement  of  true  Religion 
and  for  the  abolishment  of  the  contrary,"  in  which 
many  regulations  were  made  as  to  the  proper  use  of 
the  Bible,  and,  among  other  things,  practices  like  that 
of  Porter  were  distinctly  made  penal.  For  one  clause 
enacts : — 

That  no  manner  of  person  or  persons,  after  the  first  day  of 
October  next  ensuing,  shall  take  upon  him  or  them  to  read, 
preach,  or  teach  openly  to  other[s]  in  any  church  or  open 
assembly  within  any  the  King's  dominions,  the  Bible  or  any 
part  of  Scripture  in  English ;  or  by  any  other  person  or 
persons  cause  it  or  any  part  thereof  openly  to  be  read, 
preached,  or  taught  to  other  in  any  church  or  open  assembly 
as  is  aforesaid,  unless  he  be  so  appointed  thereunto  by  the 
King's  Majesty  or  by  any  ordinary,  or  by  such  as  have  rule, 
government  and  authority  to  make  deputation  or  assignment 
of  the  same,  upon  pain  that  every  such  offender  .  .  .  shall 
suffer  imprisonment  of  one  month. 


302   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

This  was  really  a  provision  for  the  keeping  of 
good  order  in  church,  to  prevent  agitators,  however 
full  of  biblical  zeal,  from  disturbing  congregations. 
But  the  general  scope  of  the  Act  was  far  wider.  It 
forbade  the  printing  or  sale  of  prohibited  books,  the 
playing  of  interludes  or  singing  or  rhyming  any 
matter  contrary  to  the  doctrines  laid  down  since  the 
year  1540 — the  punishment  even  for  the  first  offence 
of  such  a  character  being  three  months'  imprisonment 
and  a  fine  of  £10  for  every  illicit  book.  For  the 
keeping  of  any  English  books  against  the  Sacrament 
of  the  Altar  or  in  favour  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
Anabaptists,  or  any  other  English  books  that  had 
been  prohibited,  the  penalty  was  £5.  But  Bibles 
and  New  Testaments  in  English  which  were  not  of 
Tyndale's  translation  were  not  to  come  under  the 
Act  unless  they  contained  annotations  or  preambles ; 
if  they  did,  the  owners  were  to  cut  or  blot  them  out 
before  the  1st  October  following  under  a  penalty  of 
An  Act  forty  shillings.  Noblemen  and  gentlemen  house- 
Jhfise'of  holders  might  read  the  Bible  or  allow  it  to  be  read 
bibles.  quietly  in  their  own  families,  and  even  merchants 
who  were  householders  might  read  it  privately.  But 
the  liberty  granted  by  the  King  to  his  subjects  gener- 
ally to  read  it  had  been  so  much  abused  by  a  great 
multitude  of  them,  especially  "  of  the  lower  sort," 
that  women,  artificers,  prentices,  and  others  under 
the  degree  of  yeomen  were  henceforth  forbidden  to 
do  so,  either  privately  or  openly,  under  pain  of  a 
month's  imprisonment  for  each  offence,  unless  the 
King,  perceiving  their  lives  to  be  amended  by  the 
doctrines  he  had  set  forth,  thought  fit  to  give  them 
liberty  to  read.  Other  persons  not  of  those  lower 
grades  might  read  the  Bible  to  themselves  ;  and  every 
noblewoman  or  gentlewoman  might  read  it  to  herself, 
but  not  to  others.^ 

Such  was  the  last  legislation  of  Henry  VIII.  on 

1  Stat.  34  &  35  Hen.  VIII.  c.  1. 


CH.  I        STORY  OF  THE  ENGLISH   BIBLE       303 

the  subject  of  bibles,  and  such  later  utterances  and 
proclamations  of  his  as  referred  to  it  were  conceived 
in  the  same  spirit.  He  had  no  natural  desire  that 
"  the  Word  of  God  "  and  questions  of  doctrine  should 
be  made  a  cause  of  noisy  discussions  in  church  and 
"jangled  in  every  ale  house."  But  his  own  past 
policy  was  greatly  answerable  for  results  so  un- 
seemly ;  and  truly  it  was  scarcely  consistent  on  his 
part  to  punish  irreverent  use  of  a  Bible  which  he 
himself  had  caused  to  be  set  up  in  churches,  though 
his  bishops,  with  few  exceptions,  had  declared  it  to 
be  a  book  of  mischievous  tendency. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE   MAKING   OF   FORMULARIES 

In  our  last  chapter  we  have  traced  the  story  of  the 
different  English  translations  of  the  Bible  during 
Henry  VIII, 's  reign,  and  shown  some  of  the  influences 
which  promoted  their  sale  or  controlled  their  use. 
But  the  same  period  which  saw  the  issue  of  these 
different  English  translations  witnessed  also  the 
publication  of  three  authorised  formularies  of  faith  ; 
and  the  influences  under  which  these  formularies 
were  produced  have  a  most  important  bearing,  not 
only  on  the  subject  of  the  Bible  itself,  but  also  on 
certain  matters  of  very  great  significance,  for  the  full 
understanding  of  which  it  is  necessary  to  devote  a 
special  chapter  to  the  subject,  notwithstanding  that 
some  part  of  the  ground  has  been  traversed  already. 

Of  these  three  authorised  formularies  published  in 
this  reign,  the  first  two  have  already  been  slightly 
referred  to.  And  my  purpose  now  is  not  so  much  to 
examine  their  contents  as  to  inquire  into  the  history 
of  their  formation.  But  it  may  be  as  well  at  the 
outset  for  the  reader  to  take  notice  of  the  dates  at 
which  they  were  issued,  that  he  may  consider  their 
relation  to  preceding  and  subsequent  events.  They 
were  as  follows  : — 

I.  "  Articles  devised  by  the  Kinges  Hignes 
Majestic  to  stablyshe  Christen  quietnes  and  unitie 
amonge  us  and  to  avoyde  contentious  opinions ; 
which  articles  be  also  approved  by  the  consent  and 

304 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        305 

determination  of  the  hole  clergie  of  this  Realme, 
Anno  MDXXXVL"  This  "Book  of  Articles,"  as  it 
was  called  at  first,  is  commonly  spoken  of  by  his- 
torians as  "  the  Ten  Articles,"  as  that  was  the  number 
of  headings  under  which  the  vital  principles  of  the 
faith  were  summed  up.  It  was  published  in  July 
1536,  two  months  after  the  fall  of  Anne  Boleyn. 

II.  "The  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man."  Pub- 
lished in  1537,  just  about  a  year  after  the  preceding. 

III.  "A  Necessary  Doctrine  and  Erudition  for 
any  Christian  Man."  Published  at  the  end  of  May 
1543. 

All  three  were  printed  by  Berthelet,  the  King's 
printer.  What  was  it  that  called  for  their  publica- 
tion ? 

The  King  was  now  "  Supreme  Head "  of  the 
Church  of  England.  He  had  excluded  all  refer- 
ence to  Rome  on  matters  of  faith  and  doctrine, 
as  well  as  of  Church  discipline.  He  had  taken  the 
Pope's  place,  and  with  it  he  had  taken  upon  himself 
responsibilities  which  no  King  of  England  had  ever 
undertaken  before.  The  bishops  and  clergy  were 
still  the  spiritual  rulers  of  the  people,  and  their 
authority  was  generally  accepted  as  it  had  been 
in  the  past.  But  there  was  always  a  possibility 
of  individual  directors  of  the  conscience  being 
themselves  misled,  and  if  even  bishops  disagreed 
and  there  was  to  be  no  reference  to  Rome,  who 
was  to  decide  disputes  in  the  last  instance  except 
the  "  Supreme  Head "  himself  ?  It  is  true  that, 
just  as  in  Acts  of  State  he  guarded  himself  against  How 
personal  responsibility  by  that  high  constitu-  ^g^^fsed 
tional  doctrine  that  the  King  can  do  no  wrong  and  his 
only  ministers  can  be  made  accountable,  so  also  he  ^'^p''®™*^^ 
intended  to  exercise  his  new  Supremacy  in  Church 
matters.  He  would  throw  the  responsibility  of 
everything,  as  much  as  possible,  on  the  ofticial 
guardians  of  religion,  the  bishops.     If  they  disagreed, 

VOL.   II  X 


3o6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

his  Vicegerent  in  spiritual  things  was  Thomas 
Cromwell,  and  he  could  lay  the  responsibility  upon 
his  shoulders.  If,  finally,  the  tyranny  of  his  Vice- 
gerent became  insupportable  and  threatened  to  pro- 
duce dangerous  consequences,  he  could  be  got  rid  of, 
as  he  ultimately  was.  Meanwhile  the  true  principles, 
which  alone  could  make  for  peace  and  order,  would 
gradually  reassert  themselves ;  and  the  King  would 
still  take  care  to  show  that  he  had  never  sanctioned, 
and  never  would  sanction,  anything  that  was  not 
truly  orthodox.  This  clue  must  be  carefully  pre- 
served by  any  one  who  would  hope  to  understand 
either  the  religious  or  the  political  complexities  of 
Henry's  reign. 

But,  however  much  the  King  would  divest  him- 
self of  responsibility,  he  could  not  divest  himself  of 
the  anxieties  due  to  a  position  which  he  had  actually 
created  for  himself.  In  throwing  off  spiritual  sub- 
jection to  Rome  he  had  not  only  intimidated  the 
clergy,  but  had  naturally  filled  up  vacancies  among 
the  bishops  by  a  new  set  of  prelates,  who  easily 
accepted  Royal  Supremacy,  and  took  no  oath  of 
obedience  to  the  Pope  in  respect  of  their  bishoprics. 
Such  men  were  only  to  be  found  among  those  whose 
minds  were  more  or  less  affected  by  the  principles  of 
LoUardy ;  and  a  new  school  of  bishops  thus  arose 
who,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  were  bound 
to  difi'er  considerably  on  some  points  from  their 
brother  bishops,  and  whose  disputes  in  Convocation 
might  have  led  to  serious  difficulties  had  they  not 
all  been  bound,  willingly  or  unwillingly,  by  the  new 
allegiance.  At  the  time  of  the  making  of  the  Ten 
Articles,  bishops  of  the  new  school  had  only  been 
appointed  during  the  previous  three  years ;  for  even 
when  the  King  was  still  prosecuting  his  divorce,  and 
knew  well  enough  that  he  must  ultimately  break 
with  Rome  in  order  to  marry  Anne  Boleyn,  he 
appointed  to  important  bishoprics  men  like  Edward 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        307 

Lee,  Stokesley,  and  Gardiner,  whose  ideas  were 
entirely  formed  on  the  old  system  of  the  Church. 
And  though  these  men  might  accept  and  even  write 
in  favour  of  the  new  Supremacy,  as  all  bishops  were 
required  to  do,  they  did  not  like  the  doctrinal 
tendencies  of  those  who  became  bishops  shortly  after 
them.  For  during  those  three  years  what  men  had 
been  promoted  ?  First,  Cranmer,  who  while  in  Bishops  of 
embassy  in  Germany  had  cultivated  relations  with  school.^ 
the  Protestants,  and  married  a  niece  of  Osiander. 
The  marriage,  of  course,  was  in  itself  uncanonical  and 
therefore  unrecognised  by  the  Church,  like  a  good 
many  other  clerical  marriages ;  but  the  Protestant 
connection  looked  ill.  Then  there  were  Koland  Lee 
promoted  to  Coventry  and  Lichfield,  Goodrich  to 
Ely,  and  Capon  to  Bangor,  in  1534  —  all  mere 
serviceable  tools.  Then  foreigners  were  deprived  of 
bishoprics  by  Act  of  Parliament,  and  in  the  places  of 
two  Italian  absentees  Shaxton  was  made  Bishop  of 
Salisbury,  and  Latimer  Bishop  of  Worcester — both 
favourable  specimens  of  the  new^  school,  but  both 
a  little  subservient.  These  two  promotions  were  in 
1535,  as  was  also  that  of  Foxe,  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
who  had  assisted  Gardiner  in  promoting  the  King's 
policy  at  Rome,  and  more  recently  had  been  trying  to 
find  a  basis  of  religious  concord  with  the  Protestants 
in  Germany.  Finally,  there  was  William  Barlow, 
made  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph  first  while  on  an  embassy 
to  Scotland,  and,  three  months  later,  of  St.  David's, 
a  very  unscrupulous  man.  Eight  bishops  in  all 
promoted  under  the  Anne  Boleyn  influence,  or  more 
than  one-third  of  the  entire  bench.  Since  her  fall, 
the  balance  had  been  slightly  redressed  by  the  prefer- 
ment of  Abbot  Repps,  or  Rugge,  one  of  the  mitred 
abbots,  to  Norwich,  and  of  Sampson,  Dean  of  the 
Chapel  Royal,  to  Chichester.  These,  indeed,  were 
not  men  given  to  heresy ;  and  they  had  been  pro- 
moted not  long  before  the  promulgation  of  the  Ten 


3o8   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Articles,  to  which  their  signatures   as  bishops  were 
appended  along  with  those  of  the  others. 

These  Ten  Articles,  then,  were  formulated  and 
approved  in  a  Convocation  which  met  at  St.  Paul's 
on  the  9th  June,  the  month  after  Anne  Boleyn's 
fall.  This  was  a  special  Convocation,  in  which  the 
clergy  of  the  Northern  province  sat  along  with 
those  of  the  Southern.  A  new  Parliament  had 
opened  just  the  day  before,  having  been  called  prin- 
cipally to  pass  a  new  Succession  Act  and  also  a 
final  Act  "  for  extinguishing  the  authority  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,"  which  subjected  all  who  acknow- 
ledged that  authority  to  the  penalties  of  prcemunire, 
and  compelled  justices  everywhere  to  make  inquiry 
as  to  any  persons  who  upheld  it.^  This  measure  was, 
undoubtedly,  drawn  up  in  expectation  of  the  issue 
of  a  bull  for  a  General  Council,  in  preparation  for 
which  the  Pope  was  now  summoning  divines  to 
Rome — among  them  the  Englishman,  Reginald  Pole, 
not  yet  made  Cardinal.  And  one  thing  which  was 
expected  of  this  English  Convocation  was  a  thing  in 
which  it  easily  concurred,  when  bishops  and  clergy 
united  in  setting  their  signatures  to  an  opinion  that 
General  Councils  should  be  summoned  by  princes, 
and  not  by  the  sole  authority  of  "  the  Bishops  of 
Rome." ' 
The  Con-  In   truth,  this  special   Convocation  was   expected 

jime  i°536.  to  do  the  Kiug's  work ;  which,  indeed,  was  not 
very  wonderful,  for  Convocations  had  always  been 
summoned  for  the  King's  business — by  archbishops, 
no  doubt,  but  by  virtue  of  the  King's  writ  to  each 
archbishop  to  call  his  clergy  together.  So  that  it 
was  always  for  the  King's  sake  and  to  assist  him  in 
promoting  what  was  held  to  be  the  public  weal  that 
Convocation  met  at  all,  though  when  it  did  meet  it 
was  always  free  to  discuss  spiritual  matters  as  well  as 
the  King's  secular  needs.    But  now  there  was  no  doubt 

1  Stat.  28  Hen.  VIII.  c.  10.  ^  L.  P.,  xi.  80,  124. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        309 

that  the  King's  needs  were  spiritual  as  well  as  secular 
in  character.  And  Convocation  was  to  be  made  to 
feel  that  it  had  not  even  the  privilege  allowed  in 
that  day  to  the  House  of  Commons  of  deliberating 
by  itself,  without  being  continually  under  the  eye  of 
the  King's  ministers.  After  listening:  to  Latimer's 
arrogant  sermon  at  the  opening,  of  which  an  account 
has  already  been  given/  the  bishops  were  visited 
on  the  second  day,  the  16th  June,  by  Dr.  William 
Petre,  who  said  that  as  the  King  was  Supreme  Head 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  a  chief  place  in  the 
Synod  should  be  set  apart  for  him,  which  the  Lord 
Cromwell,  his  Vicar-General  in  ecclesiastical  causes, 
had  a  right  to  occupy,  he  himself  desired  that  place 
as  Cromwell's  deputy ;  and  it  was  assigned  to  him 
accordingly.  At  the  third  sitting,  on  the  21st  June, 
Cromwell  himself  appeared,  while  the  Archbishop 
produced  the  sentence  of  nullity  of  the  marriage  of 
the  King  and  Anne  Boleyn,  which  was  signed  a 
week  later  by  the  prelates  and  the  Prolocutor.  But 
at  the  fourth  sitting  on  23rd  June,  something  of  a 
different  character  took  place,  which  showed  that 
the  Church  had  still  a  good  deal  of  independence 
left. 

The  Prolocutor  brought  up  from  the  Lower  House  The  Lower 
and  laid  before   the  Archbishop  a  book   of  protest  ^fenmmces 
against  sixty-seven  mala  dogmata,  which  were  openly  various 
preached  by  various   clergymen  in   the  province  of   ®'^®^'®^- 
Canterbury.      Some   of  these   dogmas    were   simply 
Lollard,   and  one  or  two  smacked  of  Lutheranism, 
Moreover,    the   Lower   House    complained   that   the 
bishops  had  not  expressly  condemned  various  heretical 
books  which  they  had  already  pointed  at,  some   of 
which  had  even  got  abroad  cum^  privilegio,  although 
not  formally  sanctioned  by  the  King.     And,  whereas 
Latimer  in  his  sermon  had  spoken  in  favour  of  cur- 
tailing  the   number  of  holidays,  the   Lower  House 

1  See  pp.  90,  91,  ante. 


3IO  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

distinctly  reproved,  among  other  things,  the  opposition 
to  their  observance.  It  was  owing,  of  course,  to  the 
leaven  of  heresy  among  the  Anne  Bolejn  bishops 
that  action  was  not  taken  altogether  as  the  Lower 
House  desired. 

On  the  11th  July  Foxe,  Bishop  of  Hereford,  pro- 
duced a  Book  of  Articles  of  faith  and  ceremonies 
which  was  signed  by  Cromwell,  the  Archbishop,  and 
other  prelates,  and  the  clergy  of  the  Lower  House. 
This  was  the  Book  of  Articles  above  referred  to : 
and  I  shall  not  dwell  upon  the  proceedings  of  this 
Convocation  longer  except  briefly  to  say  that,  on 
the  19th,  ordinances  were  agreed  to  by  Cromwell 
and  both  Houses  for  the  observance  of  feast  days 
throughout  the  year ;  and  that  on  the  20th,  Bishop 
Foxe  produced  a  bill  of  reasons  why  the  King 
should  not  appear  in  the  General  Council  now 
summoned  by  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome,"  Which  bill 
being  signed  by  Cromwell  and  the  members  of 
both  Houses,  the  Convocation  was  dissolved  in  the 
afternoon.^ 

Such  was  the  way  in  which  the  Ten  Articles  were 
authorised.  What  was  their  origin  ?  Some  writers 
have  not  untruly  found  for  them  a  German  origin ; 
for  there  is  no  doubt  a  good  deal  of  their  language 
was  derived  from  Lutheran  documents,  and  the  fact 
that  Bishop  Foxe,  who  presented  them,  had  just  re- 
turned from  Germany,  where  he  had  been  in  com- 
munication with  German  divines,  no  doubt  explains 
a  good  deal.  But  these  Articles  were  by  no  means 
completely  Lutheran.  On  the  contrary,  they  con- 
tained very  little,  except  in  the  way  of  omission, 
to  which  the  most  orthodox  Romanist  could  object. 
Indeed,  Reginald  Pole,  who  was  then  at  Venice, 
ardently  hoped,  when  he  received  a  copy,  that  they 
indicated  a  design  on  the  King's  part  to  restore  true 
principles  of  religion,  if  not  even  to  return  to  the 

1  Wilkins,  iii.  803-807. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        311 

unity  of  the  Church.^     For  their  contents  were  briefly 
as  follows  : — 

First,  they  set  forth  the  authority  of  the  three  Contents  of 
Creeds  ;  the  Sacraments  of  Baptism,  Penance,  and  the  Artjcj^ 
Altar ;  the  doctrine  of  Justification  (which  was  to 
be  attained  "  by  contrition  and  faith  joined  with 
charity  ") ;  the  right  use  of  images,  the  honouring  of 
saints,  praying  to  saints,  rites  and  ceremonies,  and 
purgatory, — as  to  which  last  article  preachers  were  to 
urge  that  "  no  man  ought  to  be  grieved  with  the 
continuance "  of  the  practice  of  praying  for  souls 
departed,  but  abuses  were  condemned  which  had  been 
advanced  under  the  name  of  purgatory,  suggesting 
that  souls  might  be  delivered  thence  by  "  the  Bishop 
of  Rome's  pardon,"  or  "  masses  said  at  Scala  Cceli." 

In  the  preamble  the  King  declared  that  he  had 
always  considered  it  the  most  weighty  of  all  the 
responsibilities  of  his  "  princely  office "  to  see  that 
God's  word  should  be  truly  believed  and  kept,  and 
unity  of  opinions  in  religion  should  be  fostered,  so 
as  to  extinguish  a  number  of  discords  that  had  un- 
happily sprung  up.  For  this  purpose  he  had  caused 
the  bishops  and  clergy  of  the  whole  realm  to  assemble 
in  Convocation,  where,  after  mature  discussion,  they 
had  agreed  not  only  as  to  what  matters  were  com- 
manded by  God  and  necessary  to  salvation,  but  also 
as  to  "  honest  ceremonies  and  good  and  politic  order." 

How,  then,  it  will  be  asked,  if  there  was  Lutheran 
language  in  these  Articles,  could  the  Articles  them- 
selves have  struck  minds  like  that  of  Reginald  Pole 
as  tending  to  favour  orthodoxy  ?  At  home  they 
did  not  give  general  satisfaction,  as  was  very  soon 
apparent.  But  this  was  partly  because  the  authority 
under  which  they  were  issued,  being  avowedly  the 
King's,  even  though  they  were  the  result  of  synodical 

1  L.  P.,  XI.  1197.  The  date  "  Festo  S.  Joannis  Baptistse"  cannot  well 
mean  24th  June,  under  which  Pole's  letter  is  noticed.  That  is,  indeed,  the 
day  dedicated  to  the  Nativity  of  St.  John  the  Baptist ;  but  the  feast  intended 
was  probably  his  "Decollation,"  29th  August. 


312   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

action,  was  not  felt  to  be  the  right  authority  in  such 
matters.  A  more  serious  grievance,  however,  was 
found  in  the  omissions.  The  Articles  set  forth  only 
three  sacraments  out  of  the  recognised  seven,  and  said 
nothing  about  the  other  four,  just  as  if  they  had 
never  been  heard  of.  This  was  certainly  the  chief 
objection  felt  to  them,  especially  by  the  King's 
Northern  subjects,  who  were  less  under  the  shadow 
of  direct  royal  influence  than  those  in  the  home 
counties.  The  positive  statements  in  the  Articles 
seem  nowhere  to  have  been  impugned  ;  but  sacra- 
ments passed  over  seemed  to  be  discredited,  and 
the  minds  of  the  people  were  disquieted.  In  spite, 
however,  of  an  apparently  Lutheran  origin  and  of 
Lutheran  turns  of  expression  in  this  remarkable 
document,  we  may  fairly  consider  it  orthodox  so  far 
as  it  went ;  and  how  it  should  have  been  so,  under 
the  circumstances  of  the  case,  certainly  deserves 
attentive  consideration. 

Of  one  thing  there  is  no  doubt.  The  heading 
prefixed  to  the  Ten  Articles  themselves  implies 
that  there  was  at  this  time  a  mass  of  "  contentious 
opinions "  in  the  community ;  and  the  pronounce- 
ment of  the  Lower  House  of  Convocation  on  the 
sixty  -  seven  evil  dogmas  preached  by  some  only 
emphasises  the  same  fact.  That  these  dogmas  were 
really  a  sign  of  a  progressive  theology  beneficial  in 
its  efiects  among  the  public,  is  a  view  rather  difiicult 
to  maintain.  Good,  honest  Fuller,  writing  a  century 
later,  frankly  admits,  as  every  one  must  do,  that 
many  of  them  were  both  extravagant  and  profane, 
containing,  to  use  his  own  words,  "  many  vile  and 
distempered  expressions."  He  nevertheless  found  in 
a  few  of  them  "  the  Protestant  religion  in  ore " — 
that  is  to  say,  what  he  considered  wholesome  truth 
imbedded  in  much  corruption.  And  in  this,  perhaps, 
we  might  agree  with  him  if  the  negations  of  Pro- 
testantism were  valuable  in  themselves  and  not  merely 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        313 

as  a  protest  against  too  much  dogmatism  by  a  Church 
professing  to  be  Catholic.  But  was  it  not  right, 
before  the  old  traditions  of  authority  had  been  given 
up,  before  even  any  new  theology  had  been  imposed 
by  any  recognised  authority  whatever,  that  the 
Church  should  rebuke  men  who  freely  spoke  about 
sacred  things  in  the  way  which  that  catalogue  of 
sixty-seven  evil  dogmas  showed  had  become  common  ? 
"  Why  should  I  see  the  sacring  of  the  high  mass  ? " 
some  would  say.  "Is  it  anything  else  but  a  piece  of 
bread,  or  a  little  pretty  round  robin  ? "  Was  the 
Sacred  Synod  of  the  Church  not  even  to  protest 
against  the  denial  of  extreme  unction  as  a  sacrament  ? 
Was  it  right  to  be  silent  when  men  said  that  priests 
had  no  more  authority  to  administer  sacraments  than 
the  laity  ?  or  even — against  old  practice,  though  in 
agreement  with  modern  feeling — "  that  children  ought 
not  to  be  confirmed  by  the  bishop  till  they  come  to 
years  of  discretion  "  ?  These  are  the  first  four  dogmas 
reprehended,  and  not  the  most  extreme.  The  sea 
makes  inroads  on  the  land  in  places  and  washes  away 
the  standing  ground  of  past  generations.  But  they 
who  value  the  firm  land  of  faith  will  defend  it 
vigorously ;  and  nothing  that  is  valuable  there  can 
ever  be  really  lost. 

We  see,  however,  that  in  1536 — the  year  of  Anne 
Boleyn's  fall — -there  was  much  ventilation  of  novel 
doctrines,  whether  good  or  bad.  And  we  also  see  that 
a  few  of  these  were  of  Lutheran  origin.  But  German 
theology,  as  a  whole,  was  not  popular  in  England — 
indeed,  we  may  freely  say  it  never  has  been ;  for  the 
minds  of  average  Englishmen  are  never  very  receptive  of 
ideas  essentially  scholastic  in  their  origin,  as  Lutheran 
ideas  were.  Lutheranism  had  got  some  hold  at  the 
universities,  but  not  among  the  people.  Luther  con- 
fessed a  debt  to  Wyclifi'e,  but  Wycliffe's  countrymen 
were  slow,  even  at  this  time,  to  accept  their  own 
wares  back  again.     Still,  there  were  scholastic  as  well 


314  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

as  popular  errors  in  the  mala  dogmata.  But  the 
use  of  Lutheran  language  in  the  Ten  Articles  was 
due  to  another  cause. 

Early  in  the  year  1535  the  King  had  despatched 
Dr.  Barnes  to  Germany  on  a  mission  which  did  not 
The  King  comc  to  much.  It  was  to  get  the  opinions  of 
German  Luthcrau  divincs  on  that  matrimonial  question  in 
Lutherans,  which  hc  was  SO  mucli  personally  interested.^  As 
to  the  doctrinal  matters  in  which  the  Lutherans 
themselves  were  interested,  Barnes  had  little  to 
say.  The  King  apparently  did  not  care  much  for 
them.  But  no  cruelty,  Barnes  assured  them,  was 
used  in  England  towards  those  of  a  better  way  of 
thinking ;  and  Melancthon  wrote  to  the  King  a  letter 
full  of  high  praise  for  his  encouragement  of  learning, 
hoping  that  he  would  use  his  great  influence  to 
remedy  abuses  in  the  Church.  Not  very  long 
afterwards  it  would  seem  that  he  received  through 
Barnes  an  invitation  to  visit  the  King  in  England, 
which  he  was  preparing  to  obey.^  In  the  autumn 
Edward  Foxe,  Bishop -elect  of  Hereford,  was  also 
despatched  to  Germany,  with  letters  to  the  Elector, 
John  Frederic  of  Saxony  and  the  other  Protestant 
princes  with  a  view  to  an  alliance  between  the  King 
and  them  for  mutual  protection  against  the  Pope  and 
the  Emperor.  This  would  naturally  be  a  religious 
league,  with  a  view  to  which  Foxe  was  to  ascertain  on 
what  points  the  Lutheran  divines  had  so  fully  made 
up  their  minds  that  they  could  not  be  persuaded  other- 
wise.^ Of  course  it  was  desirable  for  both  parties  to 
avoid  insisting  on  anything  that  could  not  be  main- 
tained, lest  they  should  suffer  a  defeat  in  the  coming 
Council ;  and  Foxe  was  to  suggest  that  the  Elector 
should  send  an  ambassador  to  the  Kins;  to  discuss 
matters,  not  only  to  make  sure  of  their  common  ground, 

1  L.P.,  VIII.  375,  384.  "^  L.  P.,  viii.  630. 

'  L.  P.,  IX.  213,  the  date  of  which  would  seem  to  be  a  little  later  than  it 
has  been  placed,  as  Foxe's  credentials  were  dated  30th  September.  See 
Mentz's  Die  Wittenberger  Artikel  von  1536,  p.  3,  n.  2. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        315 

but  to  enable  them  to  insist  that  the  Council  should 
be  held  in  a  free  and  indifferent  place,  not  merely  in 
a  place  that  the  Pope  and  Emperor  were  agreed  upon. 
After  expatiating  on  these  matters  he  might  propose 
some  articles,  such  as  upon  free  will,  the  power  of  the 
Church,  or  the  like,  merely  to  open  the  way  for  fuller 
discussion,  and  also  to  put  forward  the  King's  own 
special  grievance  against  the  Pope  for  giving  sentence 
in  favour  of  the  Emperor's  aunt  (Katharine  of  Aragon) 
against  him.  But  he  must  not  make  the  determina- 
tion of  the  King's  matrimonial  question  a  principal 
cause  of  his  coming.  With  Foxe  there  was  also 
despatched  on  the  same  mission  Dr.  Nicholas  Heath.  ^ 
The  Protestants  were  highly  pleased,  and  sent  the 
King  an  answer  about  their  union  and  steadfastness 
in  the  faith,  and  their  attitude  with  regard  to  the 
Council,  and  how  they  rejoiced  that  the  King  sought 
an  agreement  with  them  in  doctrine,  promising  to 
cause  their  councillors  to  confer  with  the  King's 
ambassadors  on  the  subject.^  The  first  result  of  the 
King's  overtures  appears  to  be  set  forth  in  a  document 
called  the  "  Petition  "  of  the  Elector  of  Saxony  and 
the  Landgrave  of  Hesse  to  the  King  of  England,  which 
was  laid  before  his  ambassadors  at  Schmalkalden  on 
Christmas  Day.^  In  this  the  political  basis  of  the 
alliance  was  set  forth  for  the  King's  approval.  Neither 
party  was  to  agree  to  a  General  Council  without  mutual 
consent,  and  if  they  could  not  agree  both  were  to  do 
their  utmost  to  oppose  its  meeting.  Conditions  of 
pecuniary  aid  from  the  King  in  defence  of  the  league 
were  also  laid  down.  The  ambassadors  then  withdrew 
to  Wittenberg  to  pave  the  way  for  a  further  agree- 
ment as  to  the  doctrines  both  sides  were  to  support, 
and  there  they  continued  in  conference  with  the 
Lutheran  divines  till  April  1536.  Foxe  had,  no  doubt, 
brought  with  him  from  England,  as  Barnes  expected, 

1  See  L.  P.,  IX.  213  (4),  217-9,  1018.  2  Mentz,  pp.  5,  6. 

=*  L.  P.,  IX.  1016,  1018. 


3i6   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

certain  Articles  "  for  the  stablishing  of  Christendom 
and  the  stopping  of  adversaries'  mouths  "  ;  ^  but  how 
far  the  purport  of  these  Articles  served  as  a  basis  in 
their  conferences  we  cannot  tell,  for  their  tenor  does 
not  appear  to  be  preserved.  Even  these  were  prob- 
ably founded  to  some  extent  on  the  Confession  of 
Augsburg,  of  which  Cranmer  could  have  imparted  the 
contents  before  they  were  drawn  up.  In  any  case,  the 
general  drift  of  the  agreement  could  not  be  doubtful 
when  the  English  were  in  constant  communication 
with  Luther,  Melancthon,  Bugenhagen,  Justus  Jonas, 
and  Cruciger.^ 

In  point  of  fact,  though  Luther  undoubtedly  agreed, 
it  is  Melancthon's  pen  that  seems  to  have  drawn 
The  Wit-  up  "the  Wittenberg  Articlcs  of  1536,"  which  have 
A?Ssof  ^^^S  been  known  to  Church  historians,  and  which 
1536.  Seckendorff  ^  describes  as  a  repetitio  et  exegesis  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession.  To  these  Articles,  sixteen  in 
number,  Henry's  agents  believed  that  he  would  make 
no  serious  opposition,  and  we  may  surmise  that  they 
were  transmitted  to  England  in  April  by  Dr.  Barnes, 
who  went  over  about  that  time.*  But  some  of  them, 
certainly,  were  not  likely  to  find  favour  in  England, 
and  others  the  King  would  probably  not  accept  without 
material  alteration.  Even  in  ordinary  diplomacy  he 
was  not  accustomed  simply  to  adopt  the  projects  of 
others,  and  what  he  was  engaged  in  now  was  really 
religious  diplomacy.  He  knew  something  of  divinity 
himself;  for  that  matter,  enough  to  secure  himself 
plausibly  in  every  position  he  took  up.  But  he  did 
not  mean  to  commit  himself  in  any  way  without  the 
advice  of  his  bishops. 

How   "  the  Ten   Articles "    for  English   use  were 
elaborated  out  of  the  sixteen  Articles  of  Wittenberg 

]  L.P.,  IX.  543. 

"^  See   Mentz,  pp.  9,  10.      Dr.  Mcntz's   Introduction   is  founded    partly 
on  unpublished  matter  iu  the  Weimar  archives. 

^  Commentarius  de  Lutheranismo,  lib.  iii.  Ill  ;  Mentz,  p.  11. 
*  Mentz,  p.  13. 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        317 

we  cannot  trace  in  detail.  But  certain  it  is  that  the 
bishops  did  something,  and  that  the  King  himself 
"  put  his  own  pen  to  the  book,"  as  he  afterwards  said. 
There  was  no  doubt  a  good  deal  of  discussion  among 
the  bishops,  especially  between  those  of  the  old  school 
and  the  new.  In  the  end  a  set  of  Articles  were  agreed 
upon,  differing  altogether  from  the  German  set,  though 
retaining  in  some  passages  a  good  deal  of  the  same 
phraseology.  No  notice  was  taken  in  the  new  Articles 
of  the  proposals  for  communion  in  both  kinds  and 
marriage  of  the  clergy ;  and  the  sum  total  was,  in 
Melancthon's  opinion,  a  most  confused  production — 
confusissime  compositumwas  his  expression.^  Whether 
it  would  have  been  very  different  if  Melancthon 
himself  had  come  to  England,  as  he  was  invited  to  do, 
may  perhaps  be  doubted.  But,  when  the  news  of 
Anne  Boleyn's  fall  and  execution  reached  Germany, 
matters  were  so  greatly  changed  that  he  felt  no  longer 
called  upon  to  comply.^  The  result  of  the  English 
deliberations  was  no  doubt  what  Henry  aimed  at — a 
formula  which  the  Germans  could  not  entirely  disown 
and  the  Orthodox  could  not  heartily  denounce. 

That  Convocation  itself  would  not  willingly  have 
omitted  all  mention  of  four  out  of  the  seven  accepted 
sacraments  we  may  take  for  granted  from  what  we 
have  just  seen  of  their  disposition.     The  Ten  Articles  unpopu- 
themselves,  assuredly,  did  nothing  to  abate  religious  I^e  Ten^ 
discontent.     On  the  contrary,  those  who  stood  upon  Articles  in 
the  ancient  ways  considered  it  an  abuse  of  the  King's    ^^  ^^  ' 
proper  functions  that,  even  when  backed  by  a  weight 
of  episcopal  authority,  he  should  set   his   name  to  a 
manual  for  the  teaching  of  religion  ;  it  was  an  offence 
to  God  and  a  deorradation  both  of  Kino-  and  realm. 
So  Henry  himself  interpreted  their  murmurings  in  a 
very  remarkable  document,  issued  a  few  months  later. 
Evidently  many  of  the  clergy  had  refused  to  read  the 
Articles,  and  when  the  Lincolnshire  rebellion  broke 

^  Quoted  by  Meiitz,  p.  12.  -  L.  P.,  X.  885,  1106. 


3i8   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

out  in  October  following,  the  Ten  Articles  were  a 
particular  rock  of  offence.  This  is  noted  in  Hall's 
Chronicle,  where  the  writer,  a  strong  supporter  of 
royal  authority,  says :  "In  this  book  is  specially 
mentioned  but  three  Sacraments,  with  the  which  the 
Lincolnshire  men  (I  mean  their  ignorant  priests)  were 
offended,  and  of  that  occasion  depraved  the  King's 
Highness."  Then  in  November,  after  the  Lincolnshire 
rebellion,  barely  quieted,  had  been  followed  by  further 
disturbances  in  the  North,  the  King  addressed  a 
circular  letter  to  his  bishops,  blaming  them  severely 
for  not  having  carried  out  his  instructions  more 
effectually.  For  it  was  chiefly  owing  to  these 
murmurs,  he  considered,  that  the  insurrections  were 
due  ;  and  he  required  each  bishop,  personally,  on  every 
holiday  to  read  the  Articles  in  his  cathedral  or  in  the 
church  of  the  parish  where  he  happened  to  be  staying, 
and  to  make  a  "  collation  "  at  the  same  time,  declaring 
the  obedience  due  by  God's  law  to  the  Sovereign,  and 
always  to  compel  all  his  clergy  and  the  governors  of 
religious  houses  to  obey  the  same  order,  and  not 
allow  it  to  be  treated  with  disrespect.^ 

However  orthodox,  therefore,  they  might  be  in 
tone,  the  Ten  Articles  were  not  calculated  to  win  the 
affections  of  the  English  people,  and  what  effect  they 
had  upon  the  German  mind  we  have  seen  already  by 
the  words  of  Melancthon.  Yet  the  Germans  could  not 
but  take  the  document  as  an  attempt  towards  union 
with  them,  and  if  they  were  so  persuaded  it  served  its 
purpose  in  that  quarter.  They  were  ready,  mean- 
while, to  send  an  embassy  to  England  ;  and  John 
Frederic  of  Saxony  wrote  to  the  King  on  the  1st 
September  anxious  to  know  if  he  approved  the  Witten- 
berg Articles,  seeing  that  the  Pope  had  promised  the 
Emperor  to  call  a  General  Council,  about  which  prompt 
measures  must  be  taken.'^  Evidently  the  Germans 
had  not  even  then  received  the  Ten  Articles,  of  which 

1  L.P.,  XI.  1110.  2  2;.  p.,  XI.  388, 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        319 

Alesius  had  despatched  a  translation  to  Germany  on 
the  31st  July.^  When  they  received  them  they  must 
assuredly  have  felt  that  the  prospects  of  a  theological 
agreement  with  Henry  were  not  quite  such  as  the 
King's  envoys  had  led  them  to  suppose.  But 
Henry  was  still  a  friend  whom  they  must  not  lose 
sight  of 

He  certainly  did  not  wish  for  a  General  Council 
more  than  they  did.  But  early  next  year  (1537) 
when  one  was  actually  summoned  to  meet  at  Mantua 
on  the  23rd  May,^  their  anxiety  was  far  greater  than 
his.  Henry  himself,  in  the  beginning  of  the  year, 
was  straining  every  nerve  to  stamp  out  disaffection 
among  his  Northern  subjects,  and  fear  of  the  Council 
must  have  been  a  minor  matter  to  him.  But  to  the 
Germans  it  was  a  matter  of  urgency.  On  the  3rd 
March,  John  Frederick  of  Saxony  and  the  Landgrave 
of  Hesse  declared  at  Schmalkalden  to  the  Imperial 
ambassador,  Matthias  Held,  in  the  name  of  all  their 
confederates,  their  objections  to  the  Council ;  and  on 
the  26th  they  wrote  to  the  King  of  England  in  the 
same  fashion,  pointing  out  that  it  appeared  from 
the  bull  itself  that  the  Pope  would  never  allow 
the  restoration  of  true  doctrine  or  the  correction  of 
abuses.^  The  danger,  however,  soon  passed  away,  as 
the  Duke  of  Mantua  could  not  make  suitable  arrange- 
ments ;  and  Henry  had  received  a  warning  that  he 
would  do  best  to  leave  matters  of  faith  in  his  own 
kingdom  more  evidently  to  the  keeping  of  the  clergy. 
For  reproaches  addressed  to  his  bishops  for  not  giving 
fuller  eJBfect  to  the  Ten  Articles  had  not  turned  out  of 
great  utility,  seeing  that,  scarcely  a  fortnight  after- 
wards, amid  an  insurgent  population,  the  Northern 
clergy  met  at  Pomfret  in  an  informal  Convocation  to 
deny  Koyal  Supremacy,  uphold  the  old  clerical  im- 
munities, and  demand  restoration  of  the  suppressed 

1  L.  P.,  XI.  185.  2  x_  p^  ,^ii_  i_  432-3. 

3  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  564,  745. 


320  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

abbeys,  and  also  of  those  clergymen  who  had  suffered 
for  opposing  the  King's  superiority  over  the  Church.^ 
Very  early,  accordingly,  in  the  year  1537 — though 
the  last  thing  Henry  VIII.  ever  thought  of  conceding 
was  a  reversal  of  his  own  past  acts — he  seems  vir- 
tually to  have  admitted  that  the  Ten  Articles  might 
not  be  altogether  a  satisfactory  exposition  of  Christian 
faith  and  duty.  In  the  examinations  taken  after  the 
Lincolnshire  rebellion,  it  was  stated  among  other 
things,  that  "  every  one  grudged  at  the  new  erroneous 
opinions  touching  Our  Lady  and  Purgatory,"  ^  Some 
time,  it  would  seem,  in  the  latter  half  of  February, 
though  on  what  precise  day  we  cannot  tell,^  an 
Anew  assembly  of  bishops  and  divines  met  at  Westminster 
oTnvoca-  ^^  cousidcr  the  affairs  of  religion.  It  was  said  that 
tion.  Bishop  Foxe  would  be  President ;  but  Cromwell,  of 
course,  was  the  King's  Vicegerent,  and  it  was  he  that 
delivered  the  King's  message  to  the  Convocation.  He 
told  them  they  were  summoned  to  determine  certain 
controversies  in  religion,  which  were  disturbing  not 
only  England,  but  all  nations  throughout  the  world. 
"  For  the  King,"  he  said,  "  studieth  day  and  night  to 
set  a  quietness  in  the  Church ;  and  he  cannot  rest 
until  all  such  controversies  be  finally  debated  and 
ended  through  the  determination  of  you,  and  of  his 
whole  Parliament.  For,  although  his  special  desire 
is  to  set  a  stay  for  the  unlearned  people  whose 
consciences  are  in  doubt  what  they  may  believe —  and 
he  himself  by  his  excellent  learning,  knoweth  these 
controversies  well  enough, — yet  he  will  suffer  no 
common  alteration  but  by  the  consent  of  you  and 
his  whole  Parliament."  He  added  that  they  were 
further  desired  to  conclude  all  matters  by  the  Word 
of  God  without  brawling  or  scolding ;  neither  would 
His  Majesty  "  suffer  Scripture  to  be  wrested  or  defaced 

1  L.  P.,  XI.  1245-46.  2  jr_  p^  ^jj_  J   -Q  j_ 

*  On  the  18th,  John  Hnsee  writes  to  Lord  Lisle :  "  Mcst  part  of  tho  bishops 
have  come,  but  nobody  knows  what  is  to  be  done."     L.  P.,  xii.  i.  467. 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        321 

by  any  glosses,  any  papistical  laws,  or  by  authority 
of  doctors  and  Councils,"  Much  less  would  he  admit 
any  articles  or  doctrines  not  contained  in  Scripture 
and  approved  only  by  old  custom,  or  by  "  unwritten 
verities,"  which  they  were  so  fond  of  alleging.  He 
trusted,  however,  that  they  would  "  conclude  a  godly 
and  a  perfect  unity."  ^ 

On  the  conclusion  of  this  speech  the  bishops  all 
rose  up  and  thanked  His  Majesty  for  his  zeal,  as  in  duty 
bound.  Then  began  a  discussion  led  by  Stokesley, 
Bishop  of  London,  who,  in  spite  of  the  warning  not 
to  rest  upon  "  unwritten  verities  "  and  the  authority 
of  Fathers  and  Councils,  insisted  on  maintaining  the 
Seven  Sacraments,  and  was  supported  in  doing  so  by 
Archbishop  Lee  of  York,  and  by  Bishops  Longland  of 
Lincoln,  Clerk  of  Bath,  Sampson  of  Chichester,  and 
Rugge  of  Norwich ;  who,  on  the  other  hand,  were 
opposed  by  the  Anne  Boleyn  bishops,  Cranmer, 
Shaxton,  Goodrich,  Foxe,  and  Latimer.  Cranmer 
urged  that  it  was,  after  all,  but  a  question  of  "bare 
words,"  about  which  it  was  unseemly  for  men  of 
learning  "  to  make  much  babbling  and  brawling." 
But  would  the  bishops  venture  to  maintain  that  the 
ceremonies  of  confirmation,  of  orders,  of  annealing, 
and  so  forth,  which  could  not  be  proved  to  have 
been  instituted  by  Christ,  and  which  contained  no 
word  to  assure  remission  of  sins,  deserved  to  be  called 
Sacraments,  as  compared  with  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  ? 

Cromwell  had  brought  with  him,  to  hear  the  dis- 
cussion, a  Scotsman  named  Alexander  Alane,  whose 
surname  for  scholastic  use  was  made  into  Alesius,^  a 
scholar  of  St.  Andrews  who  had  been  driven  abroad 

^  Foxe,  V.  379.  His  account,  however,  is  derived  from  that  of  Alexander 
Alesius,  referred  to  later  on. 

-  I  regret  that  in  a  former  work  of  mine  I  have  followed  the  opinion  of 
those  who,  in  spite  of  the  positive  date,  1537,  assigned  to  this  occurrence  in 
the  book  of  Alesius  liimselt,  suppose  it  to  have  reference  to  the  formation  of 
the  Ten  Articles  in  1536.  Even  internal  probability  is  in  favour  of  the 
year  1537. 

VOL.   II  Y 


322   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

for  religion,  but  had  come  over  to  England  in  1535 
the  bearer  of  a  book  from  Melancthon  to  the  King.^ 
He  had  been  invited  to  England,  in  fact,  by  Cromwell 
and  Archbishop  Cranmer,  but,  being  then  sent  to 
read  a  lecture  at  Cambridge,  he  excited  so  much 
opposition  that  he  withdrew  and  for  a  while  took 
to  the  practice  of  physic  in  London.  According  to 
his  own  account,  he  met  Cromwell  by  chance  in  the 
street,  and  was  taken  by  him  to  this  assembly  of 
divines ;  and,  after  Cranmer  had  spoken,  Cromwell 
Aiesius  called  on  him  to  speak  also.  He  took  up  the  same 
S^he^'^^^  line  as  the  Archbishop,  that  the  first  question  was 
debate.  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  w^ord  Sacrament,  citing 
some  definitions,  and  leading  on  to  the  conclusion 
that  there  were  but  two  Sacraments  instituted  by 
Christ,  the  others  being  of  mere  human  origin.  He 
was  interrupted  by  Bishop  Stokesley,  who  denied 
vehemently  that  all  Sacraments  must  have  been 
instituted  by  Christ  or  must  signify  remission  of  sins. 
Aiesius  would  have  replied,  but  gave  place  first  to 
Bishop  Foxe,  who  made  "  a  pithy  speech  "  about  the 
doings  of  the  Germans ;  and  then,  after  a  rejoinder 
from  Stokesley,  Aiesius  continued  the  debate  till 
twelve  o'clock,  and  oftered  to  prove  next  day  that 
the  Christian  faith  rested  only  on  the  Bible.  But 
he  received  a  message  from  Cranmer  in  the  morning, 
warning  him  that  great  offence  had  been  taken  at 
his  intrusion,  as  a  mere  stranger,  into  the  debate ; 
and  Cromwell,  whom  he  consulted  on  the  subject, 
also  counselled  him  to  abstain  from  another  appear- 
ance, and  to  deliver  the  paper  he  had  written  to  him. 
In  it  he  had  railed  at  Cochlseus  and  other  opponents, 
and  accused  the  Bishop  of  London  of  "  impudent 
blasphemy."  - 

The  bishops,  however,  were  not  to  be  put  down ; 

1  L.  p.,  IX.  224-5. 

''■  All  this  comes  from  Alesius's  own  account  in  his  tract  "  Of  the  Auctorite 
of  the  Word  of  God,"  of  which  an  abstract  will  be  found  in  L.  P.,  xii.  i.  790. 


CH.  n      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        323 

and  in  the  course  of  the  spring  Archbishop  Lee 
informed  one  Dr.  Dakyn,  that  those  four  Sacra- 
ments omitted  in  the  Ten  Articles  were  "  found 
again,"  and  that  "  the  book  "  would  be  printed  anew.^ 
On  what  day  this  decision  was  come  to  does  not 
appear.  For  Palm  Sunday,  which  this  year  fell 
upon  Lady -day  (25th  March),  a  discussion  was 
arranged  on  the  Invocation  of  Saints,  on  Purgatory, 
on  Clerical  Celibacy,  and  on  "  Satisfaction."  -  But 
even  on  the  12th  May,  though  the  bishops  were  said 
to  be  "  at  a  point,"  it  was  still  unknown  what  was 
to  be  the  approved  doctrine  in  England.^  And  their  Result  of 
labours  had  only  come  near  an  end  on  Tuesday,  the  vocatSi" 
17th  July,  when  they  all  "subscribed  their  books," 
and  had  agreed  upon  certain  notes  about  the  Creed. 
A  new  and  more  elaborate  formulary  called  The 
Institution  of  a  Christian  Man  was  ready  to  go 
to  press ;  and  Bishop  Foxe  undertook  to  correct 
the  proofs.*  But  even  yet  there  was  some  further 
delay. 

When  issued  at  last,  the  work  appeared  with  a 
Preface  which  was  in  form  and  eifect  an  address  to 
the  King,  signed  by  the  assembled  divines,  stating 
that  they  presented  to  His  Majesty  the  result  of  a 
commission  he  had  imposed  upon  them  with  a  view 
to  the  removal  of  "  errors,  doubts,  and  superstitions," 
and  "  the  perfect  establishing "  of  his  subjects  "  in 
good  unity  and  concord."  They  had  begun  with  an 
exposition  of  the  Apostles'  Creed,  then  treated  of  the 
institution  and  right  use  of  the  Seven  Sacraments ; 
thirdly,  they  had  discussed  the  Ten  Commandments, 
and  fourthly,  the  interpretation  of  the  Paternoster 
and  of  the  Ave  Maria.  Finally,  to  omit  nothing- 
contained  in  "  the  Book  of  Articles "  of  the  year 
preceding,  they  had  subjoined  the  two  Articles  on 
Justification   and  Purgatory,  just  as  they  stood    in 

^  L.  p.,  XII.  i.  789  (p.  346).  ^  ^  p^  j-ii.  i.  708. 

3  L.  P.,  XII.  i.  1187.  *  L.  P.,  XII,  ii.  289. 


324  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

that  formulary.  So  the  whole  might  really  be 
regarded  as  the  Ten  Articles  enlarged  and  with 
omissions  supplied.  And  they  ended  by  petitioning 
the  King,  if  he  approved,  to  have  it  printed  and  set 
forth  with  his  sanction,  "  without  the  which  power 
and  licence  of  your  Majesty,"  they  say,  "  we  acknow- 
ledge and  confess  that  we  have  none  authority,  either 
to  assemble  ourselves  together  for  any  pretence  or 
purpose,  or  to  publish  anything  that  might  be  by 
us  agreed  on  and  compiled."  They  were  all  agreed, 
indeed,  "  that  the  said  treatise  was  in  all  points  con- 
cordant and  agreeable  to  Holy  Scripture,"  yet  they 
humbly  submitted  it  to  his  correction.  There  was 
evidently  now  quite  a  new  sense  of  a  King's  authority 
no  less  in  spiritual  matters  than  in  temporal. 

In  truth,  though  the  bishops  might  be  unanimous 
that  the  book  was  in  complete  conformity  with 
Scripture,  they  were  not  so  well  agreed  about  other 
things,  and  it  seemed  as  if  there  still  remained  at 
the  end  some  little  questions  to  be  referred  to  the 
King's  decision.  For  even  when  Foxe  wrote  to 
Cromwell,  on  the  20th  July,  that  the  bishops  had 
signed  their  books  on  the  previous  Tuesday  (the 
17th)  and  were  ready  to  go  to  press  with  the  King's 
permission,  they  still  awaited  orders  about  the  Preface, 
and  whether  the  book  was  to  go  forth  in  the  King's 
name  or  that  of  the  bishops,^  There  were  also  some 
notes  to  be  supplied  upon  the  Creed,  about  which 
they  were  agreed.  Next  day  both  Cranmer  and 
Latimer  wrote  to  Cromwell  that  these  also  would 
be  signed  on  the  following  Monday,  to  complete  the 
body  of  the  work.  Poor  Latimer,  who  was  certainly 
no  theologian,  only  hoped  that  when  it  was  done  it 
would  be  well  done.  "  For  verily,"  he  wrote,  "  for 
my  part  I  had  liever  be  poor  parson  of  Kin  ton  again 
than  to  continue  thus  bishop  of  Worcester ;  not  for 
anything  that  I  have  had  to  do  therein,  or  can  do, 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  289. 


cH.  ir      THE   MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        325 

but  yet,  forsooth,  it  is  a  troublous  thing  to  agree 
upon  a  doctrine  in  things  of  such  controversy,  with 
judgments  of  such  diversity,  every  man  (I  trust) 
meaning  well,  and  yet  not  all  meaning  one  way. 
But  I  doubt  not  but  now  in  the  end  we  shall  as^ree 
both  one  with  another,  and  all  with  the  truth,  though 
some  will  then  marvel.  And  yet,  if  there  be  any- 
thing either  uncertain  or  unpure,  I  have  good  hope 
that  the  King's  Highness  will  expurgare  quicquid 
est  veteris  fermenti ;  at  least  wise  give  it  some 
note  that  it  may  appear  he  perceive th  it,  though 
he  do  tolerate  it  for  a  time,  so  giving  place  for 
a  season  to  the  frailty  and  gross  capacity  of  his 
subjects."  ^ 

A  little  of  the  old  leaven,  it  seems,  was  to  be 
tolerated  for  a  time,  notwithstanding  Cromwell's  not 
too  scrupulous  attempt  to  purge  it  out  by  the  intru- 
sion of  a  stranger  into  the  Convocation.  The  old 
bishops,  in  truth,  had  gained  the  day  on  the  most 
important  points  when  they  got  the  four  omitted 
sacraments  restored  and  purgatory  acknowledged. 
On  the  other  hand,  justification  by  faith,  the  cardinal 
doctrine  of  the  Reformation,  was  admitted  also.  But 
it  was  a  doctrine  so  distinctly  scriptural  that  no 
divines  of  the  old  school  could  have  opposed  it. 
Luther  had  only  brought  it  into  greater  prominence  ; 
and  it  was  quite  impossible  to  overlook  its  importance 
now.  Four  years  later,  at  the  Diet  of  Ratisbon,  almost 
complete  agreement  was  come  to  about  this  doctrine, 
and  the  Lutheran  view  was  not  without  zealous  advo- 
cates even  at  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Of  the  mode  in  which  the  four  lately  discredited  oeiibera- 
sacraments  came  to  be  restored  we  have  only  partial  ti°e"sacra- 
glimpses  ;  but  they  are  interesting.      Comparatively  ments. 
little   difficulty,    apparently,    was    found    about   the 
Sacrament  of  Holy  Orders,  on  which  a  declaration 
was  signed  by  the  bishops  and  divines,  with  instruc- 

^  Latimer's  Remains,  pp.  379,  380. 


326   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

tious  how  it  was  to  be  taus^ht/  This  declaration  was 
embodied  in  the  new  book,  with  only  a  few  verbal 
alterations.  But  a  very  large  addition  was  made  : 
first,  to  guard  against  the  old  error  of  the  Donatists, 
who  regarded  a  sacrament  as  losing  its  efficacy  when 
administered  by  a  priest  of  vicious  living ;  and 
secondly,  to  set  forth  the  "  power  and  authority 
belonging  unto  priests  and  bishops."  This  was  three- 
fold :  first,  to  rebuke  and  excommunicate  obstinate 
sinners — a  power  which  was  only  exercised  by  word 
and  not  by  violence  or  constraint,  and  the  discretion 
to  be  used  in  its  exercise  is  likewise  indicated  ;  second, 
to  admit  fit  persons  to  the  office  of  preaching  and 
cure  of  souls  in  parishes  when  nominated  by  the  King 
or  other  patrons ;  and  third,  to  make  rules  for  the 
observance  of  holy  days  and  fasting  days.  But  as  no 
special  injunctions  are  given  in  Scripture  as  to  the 
mode  in  which  these  powers  are  to  be  exercised,  a 
good  deal  is  added  about  the  relations  of  priests  and 
bishops  to  the  civil  power,  and  the  falsehood  of  the 
claims  of  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  not  only  to  be  head 
and  governor  of  all  priests  and  bishops,"  but  even  to 
have  power  to  depose  kings. 

As  to  confirmation  three  questions  were  submitted 
to  the  divines,  to  which  they  individually  gave 
different  answers.     They  were  : — 

1.  "  AVhether  this  sacrament   be   a  sacrament   of 

the  New  Testament  instituted  by  Christ  or 
not  ? " 

2.  "  What  is  the  outward  sign  and  invisible  grace 

that  is  conferred  in  the  same  ?  " 

^  L.  p.,  XI.  60  (Burnet,  iv.  336).  This  document  has  unfortunately  been 
catalogued  in  the  year  1536,  as  if  it  was  the  work  of  the  Convocation  of  that 
year ;  and  I  regret  to  say  I  was  still  under  that  delusion  when  I  wrote  ni}"- 
Church  History  volume.  The  original  MS.  is  in  the  Cottonian  collection 
(Cleop.  E  V.  45),  and  one  line  omitted  by  the  clerk  has  been  supplied  in 
Cranmer's  own  handwriting.  With  one  or  two  verbal  alterations  the  whole 
text  is  embodied  in  The  Institution,  in  the  article  on  the  Saciament  of 
Orders.  But  a  very  large  addition  was  made  to  it,  beginning  with  the  words 
"Thirdly,  for  as  much,"  and  filling  nearly  eiglit  pages  (pp.  105-123)  iu 
Lloyd's  Formularies. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        327 

3.  "  What  promises  be  made  that  the  said  graces 
shall  be  received  by  this  sacrament  ?  " 

I  give  a  few  of  the  answers  to  the  first  question,  to 
exhibit  the  different  points  of  view. 

Archbisliop  Lee  considered  that  confirmation  was 
instituted  by  Christ  because  the  apostles  used  it,  as 
appeared  in  Acts,  chapters  viii.  and  xix.,  and  gave 
the  tradition  to  the  Church — an  opinion  which  he 
confirmed  by  citations  from  St.  Clement,  St.  Diony- 
sius,  St.  Augustine,  and  others.  Bishop  Goodrich 
of  Ely,  on  the  other  hand,  found  no  express  mention 
of  its  institution  by  Christ  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  the  Fathers  had  taken  it  for  a  sacrament  of  the 
New  Testament.  Bishop  Hilsey  of  Eochester  used 
rather  an  involved  argument,  to  show  that,  though 
not  exactly  instituted  by  Christ  (except,  as  St. 
Thomas  said,  by  promise),  it  was  begun  by  Holy 
Fathers  to  confirm  the  faith  of  baptized  infants  when 
they  came  to  years  of  discretion.  Bishop  Longland 
of  Lincoln  was  clear  that  it  was  a  sacrament  of  the 
New  Law  instituted  by  Christ ;  Capon  (or  Salcot)  of 
Bangor  said  it  was  a  sacrament  of  the  New  Testament, 
not  instituted  by  Christ,  so  far  as  appeared  in  Scrip- 
ture, but  by  the  Fathers.  Stokesley  of  London 
affirmed  simply  that  it  was  a  sacrament  of  the  New 
Testament.  Cranmer  found  no  place  in  Scripture 
which  declared  it  to  be  so.  The  supposed  evidence 
of  institution  in  the  New  Testament  was  only  "  acts 
and  deeds  of  the  apostles,"  and  these  were  done  by  a 
special  gift  which  did  not  now  remain. 

Such  were,  in  substance,  the  answers  of  the  first 
four  bishops,  whose  opinions  were  taken,  to  the  first 
question.  I  need  not  epitomise  those  of  the  other 
bishops  and  divines,  which  the  curious  may  study  at 
leisure,  along  with  the  opinions  of  all  upon  the  second 
and  third  questions.^  But  it  evidently  appeared  that 
even  those  who  were  most  with  Cranmer  in  his  neora- 

o 
^  Strype's  Ecclesiastical  Meviorials,  I.  ii.  340-63. 


328   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

tions  still  admitted  a  high  authority  for  the  rite,  and 
their  opinion  could  not  overrule  that  of  those  who 
held  it  to  be  a  sacrament  of  divine  institution.  There 
are  also  fragments  of  other  portions  of  "  the  Bishops' 
Book,"  as  it  was  called,  with  earlier  drafts  of  some 
parts,  extant  among  the  MSS.  in  the  Record  Office, 
which  may  perhaps  not  be  unworthy  of  minute  exam- 
ination by  some  closer  student  of  the  history  of 
doctrine.^ 

But,  after  all  the  labours  of  his  bishops,  the  King 
made  a  rather  curious  answer  to  their  request  that 
he  would  sanction  the  publication.  He  wrote  that 
he  had  found  no  sufficient  time  to  give  it  a  careful 
perusal  and  weigh  such  things  as  they  had  written, 
but,  trusting  that  men  of  such  learning  had  accom- 
plished what  they  professed,  he  had  caused  it  to  be 
printed  and  conveyed  to  all  parts  of  the  realm.  His 
object,  which  they  said  they  had  endeavoured  to  fulfil, 
was  "  to  have  a  sure  and  certain  kind  of  doctrine,  not 
as  made  by  men  but  by  them  searched  out  of  the 
Holy  Scripture,"  in  matters  "  meetest  to  be  observed 
of  men  that  profess  Christ  and  his  religion."  Not- 
TheKing  withstanding  his  occupations,  he  had  taken  "  a  taste" 
Bishops*^"^  of  the  book  and  found  nothing  that  was  not  praise- 
Book  "  to  worthy  ;  and  he  desired  them  to  set  it  forth,  expelling 
lish^d.'  for  ever,  if  possible,  "all  manner  of  idolatry,  super- 
stition, and  hypocrisy."  They  were  to  order  some 
part  of  it,  at  least,  to  be  read  every  Sunday  and 
festival  day  in  every  parish  church  for  three  years, 
that  the  people  might  be  thoroughly  familiarised  with 
its  contents.^ 

So  the  book  was  published  in  this  curious  manner, 
without  being  expressly  adopted  by  the  King,  and 
indeed  without  the  royal  imprimatur  being  printed 
in  the  book  itself,  though  the  petition  for  royal 
sanction  by  the  joint  Convocation   of  the  two  pro- 

^  L.  p.,  XII.  ii.  401. 
-  Cranraer's  Remains,  pp.  469,  470  (Parker  See. ). 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        329 

vinces,  with  their  signatures  attached,  was  allowed  to 
do  duty  as  a  Preface.  And  it  is  impossible  not  to 
feel  that,  as  Henry  was  a  master  of  statecraft,  this 
three  years'  licence,  so  given  but  not  published,  had  a 
very  distinct  and  politic  end  in  view — or  rather  two 
or  three  distinct  and  politic  ends.  For,  in  the  first 
place,  he  avoided  objections  raised  by  his  own  subjects 
— that  royal  authority  in  matters  of  faith  and  doctrine 
was  a  thing  out  of  place,  as  the  King  was  no  more 
competent  to  lay  down  principles  in  such  things 
than  to  alter  the  rules  of  grammar.  The  Institu- 
tion was  the  fruit  of  pure  sy nodical  action  by  the 
bishops  and  divines  in  Convocation.  Secondly,  he 
had  thus  fortified  himself  against  any  objections  that 
might  be  raised  by  the  Germans,  for  he  still  looked 
to  them  for  further  co-operation.  If  their  theologians 
found  anything  wrong  they  might  come  and  discuss 
it  with  English  theologians,  and  no  doubt  further 
agreement  ought  to  be  the  result.  The  King  had 
made  nothing  unalterable.  And  thirdly,  he  had 
emancipated  himself  to  a  great  extent  from  respon- 
sibility for  the  acts  of  his  Vicegerent  Cromwell,  who 
had  been  trying  hard  to  carry  out  a  religious  revolu- 
tion on  a  Lollard  basis,  discrediting  many  of  the  old 
sacraments  and  observances  as  having  no  foundation 
in  Scripture.  But  while  the  sufficiency  of  Scripture 
as  a  foundation  was  still  maintained  (even  in  "  the 
article  of  Purgatory,"  prayer  for  souls  departed  was 
justified  from  the  book  of  Maccabees),  the  publication 
of  the  Institution  was,  on  the  whole,  a  great  victory 
for  the  bishops  of  the  old  school  over  those  who  had 
been  so  vehement  aorainst  Church  traditions,  and  so 
disrespectful  even  to  the  authority  of  ancient  Fathers. 

For  it  was  in  August  of  the  year  preceding  (1536)  cromweii'i 
that  Cromwell,  as  the  Kingr's  Vicegerent,  had  issued  ^'^^t  in- 

T--  11  •  1-1        Junctions, 

those  first  Injunctions  to  the  clergy,  mentioned  m  the  August 
last  chapter  in  connection  with  the  order  contained  in  ^^^^* 
them  about  Eno^lish  and  Latin  Bibles.     But  this  was 


330  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  rk.  iv 

only  one  of  the  things  enjoined.  The  principal 
matters  were — first,  observance  of  the  Acts  abolishing 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  "  Bishop  of  Rome  "  and  con- 
firming the  King's  Supremacy ;  and  secondly,  the 
clergy  were  to  set  forth — but  with  discrimination 
between  essential  matters  of  faith  and  mere  cere- 
monies— the  Ten  Articles  and  those  abolishing  super- 
fluous holidays.  They  were  also  warned  that  images 
were  not  to  be  extolled,  and  that  pilgrimages  ought 
to  be  discouraged.  They  were  to  teach  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  Articles  of  the  Faith,  and  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments in  English.  Then  came  the  article  by 
which  every  incumbent  was  to  provide,  before  the 
1st  August  1537,  "a  book  of  the  whole  Bible,  both 
in  Latin  and  also  in  English."  Then,  priests  were  not 
to  haunt  alehouses,  and  certain  charges  were  laid  on 
non-resident  parsons  for  the  poor  of  their  parishes,  and 
on  the  richer  incumbents  for  the  support  of  scholars 
at  the  universities.^  These  articles  were  certainly  in 
advance  of  the  time  ;  but  their  worst  fault,  no  doubt, 
was  that  they  were  manifestly  forced  on  the  Church 
by  lay  authority,  and  the  unpopularity  of  their 
enforcement  fell  upon  Cromwell.  The  order  al)out 
the  Bilile  seems  to  have  been  a  job,  and  apparently 
was  not  persevered  in.  But  the  Ten  Articles  really 
received  a  higher  sanction — although  with  a  certain 
qualification — as  soon  as  The  Institution  of  a  Chris- 
tian Man  was  published.  Nor  were  images  and 
pilgrimages  here  quite  so  much  discouraged  as  in  the 
Injunctions.  The  exposition  of  the  Second  Command- 
ment expressly  admits  that  there  is  a  good  use  for 
images  in  churches,  which  is  not  prohibited ;  but  it 
reproves  the  fashion  of  "  putting  diff"erence  between 
image  and  image,  trusting  more  in  one  than  another," 
and  of  going  on  pilgrimages  "  even  to  the  images," 
and  "  calling  upon  the  same  images  for  aid  and  help." 

1  Burnet,  iv.  308-313  ;  Wilkins,  iii.  813-15.     A  copy  of  these  Injunctions 
in  the  Record  Office  is  dated  August  1536.     L.  P.,  xi.  377. 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        331 

In  fact,  the  Church  still  gave  her  sanction  to  old 
observances  in  the  abstract  as  much  as  ever,  but 
clearly  admitted  that  they  were  liable  to  abuse  and 
that  the  people  should  be  warned  against  misusing 
them. 

Now  when  the  King  saw  that  his  bishops  at  home 
were  coming  to  something  like  a  religious  settle- 
ment, he  was  ready  enough  to  declare  himself,  as 
his  German  allies  had  done,  on  the  subject  of  the 
threatened  General  Council.  But  it  was  evidently  The  ^ 
not  quite  so  early  in  the  year  as  has  been  suggested  ^J^f  ^ 
that  he  published  that  little  book  against  it  by  which  against  the 
they  were  so  delighted.^  On  the  1st  June  it  must 
have  been  still  unpublished  when  Bonner  wrote  to 
Cromwell  suggesting  its  immediate  issue  ;  for  "  what- 
ever some  men  may  think,"  he  says — which,  no  doubt, 
means  that  Gardiner,  at  least,  was  against  it,  —  he 
considers  that,  as  others  have  declared  their  opinion 
on  this  subject,  the  King  ought  not  to  withhold  his, 
especially  as  he  was  at  liberty  to  add  or  withdraw  at 
pleasure."  So  it  was  clearly  at  least  in  June,  if  not  in 
July,  that  the  little  book  was  published,  which  was  at 
once  reprinted  at  Wittenberg  and  afterwards  dis- 
seminated throughout  Germany  in  different  German 
translations  during  the  years  1537  and  1538.^ 

The  publication  of  the  Institution  bears  date 
1537.  It  took  place,  it  seems,  "at  Bartholomew- 
tide,"  that  is  to  say  in  August ;  *  and  a  good  number 
of  copies  had  certainly  been  issued  that  year  by  the 
beginning  of  October.^  Yet  on  the  10th  of  that 
month  Wriothesley  writes  to  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt  in 
Spain  that  he  refrains  from  sending  him  a  copy,  as 
it  was  to  be  amended  in  many  points.®  And  in 
January  following  (1538)  we  find  that  the  King 
made  corrections   which   Cranmer    partly   agreed   to 

^  See  Book  II.,  chap.  ix. 

2  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  7.     See  the  text  in  State  Papers,  i.  550. 

3  L.  P.,  XII.  i.  1310.  *  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  686. 

6  L.  P.,  XII.  ii.  818,  834,  846.  6  jr.  P.,  xil.  ii.  871. 


332   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

and  partly  criticised.^  The  King  certainly  felt  that 
it  was  incumbent  on  him  as  Head  of  the  Church,  who 
had  taken  the  Pope's  place,  to  decide,  ultimately,  for 
England  at  least,  what  was  right  or  wrong  in  matters 
of  theology ;  and  though  he  shielded  himself,  to  some 
extent,  from  responsibility  by  letting  the  book  go 
forth  merely  as  the  work  of  his  bishops,  they,  at  least, 
had  been  taught  by  this  time  the  full  meaning  of 
Supremacy,  and  knew  that  nothing  was  finally  settled 
without  his  sanction.  Of  this  we  shall  see  some 
further  evidence  presently.  Meanwhile  the  book 
went  forth  in  the  name  of  the  bishops,  though 
authorised,  at  least  for  temporary  use,  by  the  King. 
It  was  sometimes,  indeed,  called  "the  King's  Book,"" 
but  more  correctly  it  was  spoken  of  as  "the  Bishops' 
Book "  ;  and  a  few  years  later  "  the  King's  Book " 
became  the  more  appropriate  designation  of  the  third 
formulary,  of  which  we  have  still  to  speak. 
^. ,     ,  Yet  even  with  Episcopal  authorisation,  enforced, 

Bishops  111  1-1  •       1  •     T 

Book  "not  no  doubt,  by  each  separate  bishop  m  his  diocese,  as 
^very where  j^  clearly  was  by  Voysey,  Bishop  of  Exeter,^  it  was 
received,  not  always  well  received.  One  Mr.  Inolde,  or  Enold, 
curate  of  Rye,  was  complained  of  by  some  of  his 
parishioners  for  not  having  "  preached  down "  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  since  his  bishop's  last  visitation. 
He  had  not  even  preached  at  all,  or  read  the  Gospel 
or  Epistle  in  English  for  a  whole  twelvemonth,  and 
when  he  read  "  the  Bishops'  Book "  he  read  "  scant 
a  piece  of  a  title,"  which  apparently  was  unintelligible 
without  what  they  called  "  the  rhetoric  words."  This 
man,  indeed,  was  terribly  insubordinate,  keeping 
abrogated  holidays,  and  allowing  a  friar  to  do  daily 
service  in  the  church  in  his  friar's  apparel,  which 
Cromwell  was  just  then  insisting  that  they  should 
all  abandon.  Moreover,  the  vicar,  one  Dr.  Snede, 
who,   as  it  appears   by   other  evidences,   leased   the 

1  L.  p.,  XIII.  i.  78, 141-2.  -  L.  P.,  xin.  i.  1199,  1291. 

=*  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  1106. 


'The 


CH.  11      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        333 

profits  and  duties  of  the  living  to  Inolde  for  a  term 
of  years/  had  been  an  absentee  for  four  years  and 
neglected  everything,"  Such  a  case  naturally  called 
for  Cromwell's  interference — not,  indeed,  because  the 
living  was  leased,  a  point  of  which  nothing  was  said 
— and  he  commissioned  two  of  the  parishioners,  Alex- 
ander Wells  and  John  Raynolde,  to  search  Parson 
Inolde's  house,  and  send  up  to  him  all  books  and 
bills  found  in  it.  The  parson  seems  to  have  been 
suspended,  and  one  Alexander  Wells  took  the  services 
in  the  parish  church  under  his  control.  Wells,  ap- 
parently, would  have  taken  a  new  course,  going  a 
little  further  than  any  ordinances  or  injunctions  yet 
issued  ;  but  either  he  was  complained  of  to  the  Bishop 
of  Chichester,  or  he  wisely  forebore  from  innovation 
till  he  had  laid  the  case  before  him.  He  wrote  to 
Bishop  Sampson  on  the  26th  July  (this  was  seven 
weeks,  all  but  a  day,  after  Mr.  Inolde's  house  had  been 
searched) ;  and  the  Bishop  wrote  to  him  in  reply  on 
the  21st  August,  expressing  satisfaction  that  he  had 
not  "  enterprised  "  to  sing  any  service  in  English,  and 
hoped,  for  the  common  quietness,  that  he  would 
forbear  such  novelties  till  it  pleased  the  King  to 
declare  his  pleasure  on  matters  of  ritual.^ 

There  can  hardly  be  a  doubt  that  in  this  case 
Wells,  who  acted  under  a  commission  from  the 
King's  Vicegerent,  was  prepared,  with  Cromwell's  con- 
nivance, to  carry  a  lawless  policy  as  far  as  he  could 
be  allowed.  Indeed,  we  find  that  Bishop  Sampson, 
shortly  afterwards,  was  not  in  favour  with  Cromwell, 
no  doubt  because  he  did  his  duty.*  So  long  as  it 
was  not  a  conservative  lawlessness,  or  insubordina- 
tion to  new  commands  from  a  seemingly  new  authority, 
a  good  deal,  doubtless,  might  be  tolerated.  Cromwell  ciroiuweii'f 
was  at  this  very  time  preparing  a  new  set  of  In-  Ju^eUons 
junctions    for   the    clergy,   which    came   out    on    the  ^th  Sept.' 

1538. 

^   Valor  Ecclcsiasticus,  i.  345.  -  L.  P.,  xin.  i.  1150. 

3  L.  F.,  XIII.  ii.  147.  •*  L.  P.,  xiii.  ii.  339. 


3  34   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

5th  September.  One  of  the  first  points  contained  in 
them  was  the  article  already  quoted  about  providing 
in  every  church  a  Bible  of  the  largest  volume,  and 
allowing  it  to  be  read.  Other  articles,  too,  had  a 
plausible  justification.  It  was  an  old  complaint, 
which  doubtless  had  not  quite  lost  its  force  since  the 
days  of  "Piers  Plowman's  Creed,"  that  friars  or  clergy 
were  not  always  so  attentive  to  expound  the  Christian 
faith  to  the  laity  as  they  were  eager  about  other 
things ;  and  now  all  the  clergy  were  enjoined,  every 
Sunday  and  holy  day  throughout  the  year,  plainly 
to  recite  to  their  parishioners  "  twice  or  thrice  to- 
gether, or  oftener,  if  need  require,  one  article  or 
sentence  of  the  Paternoster  or  Creed  in  English,  to 
the  intent  that  they  may  learn  the  same  by  heart ; 
and  so,  from  day  to  day,  to  give  them  one  like  lesson 
or  sentence  of  the  same,  till  they  have  learned  the 
whole  Paternoster  and  Creed  in  English  by  rote." 
They  were  also  to  expound  the  meaning  of  these 
great  documents  and  exhort  all  parents  and  house- 
holders to  teach  them  to  their  children  and  servants. 
And,  further,  they  were  to  teach  and  expound  the 
Ten  Commandments,  one  by  one,  every  Sunday  and 
holy  day.  Then  there  was  an  order  for  sermons  to 
be  made  every  quarter  of  a  year  to  declare  "  purely 
and  sincerely  the  very  Gospel  of  Christ,"  and  not  to 
repose  their  trust  in  "men's  fantasies  besides  Scrip- 
ture." "AVandering  to  pilgrimages,  offering  of  money, 
candles  or  tapers  to  feigned  relics  or  images,  or  kissing 
or  licking  the  same,  saying  over  a  number  of  beads 
not  understood  or  minded  on,  or  such  like  super- 
stition," was  denounced  as  tending  to  idolatry.  Then 
the  clergy  were  forthwith  to  take  down  such  images 
as  they  knew  to  be  "  abused  with  pilgrimages  or 
off'erings  of  anything  made  thereunto."  If  they  had 
ever  extolled  such  practices  they  were  now  to  recant 
and  show  that  they  had  done  so  on  no  ground  of 
Scripture,  but  had  been  misled  by  a  common  error. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF   FORMULARIES        335 

These  Injunctions  further  ordered,  for  the  first 
time,  the  keeping  of  parish  registers,  and  forbade  the 
withdrawal  of  tithes  on  the  plea  that  clergymen 
neglected  their  duties  (a  plea  on  which  Wyclitie 
would  have  justified  it) ;  they  also  forbade  "  the  com- 
memoration of  Thomas  Becket,"  and  recommended 
the  omission  of  the  Ora  'pro  nobis  addressed  to  saints 
in  litanies.^ 

These  Injunctions  to  the  clergy,  issued  on  the  5th 
September,  were  followed  up  on  the  1 6th  November  a  royai 
—the  day  of  Lambert's  trial— by  a  lengthy  royal  g™'^""'^" 
proclamation,  w^hich  has  already  been  given  in  sub-  leth  Nov. 
stance,"  laying  down  orders  on  the  following  matters  : 
— The  printing  and  licensing  of  books  were  henceforth 
to  be  more  strictly  regulated.  The  circulation  of 
the  poisonous  literature  of  Sacramentaries  and  Ana- 
baptists ^  must  by  all  means  be  put  down.  Disputing 
about  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  was  not  to  be 
allowed  except  to  learned  divines  in  the  schools,  and  a 
number  of  interesting  ceremonies  were  to  be  observed 
till  the  King  was  pleased  to  change  them.  Married 
priests  were  to  be  deprived.  Orders  were  given  for 
the  bishops  and  clergy  to  set  forth  distinctly  in 
sermons  the  difference  between  things  commanded 
by  God  and  ceremonies  used  in  the  church.  Becket 
was  un sainted,  his  images  were  to  be  put  down,  and 
his  festival  no  longer  to  be  kept. 

Of  course,  the  explicit  orders  of  a  royal  joroclama- 
tion  like  this  were  generally  obeyed  through  fear. 
The  article  about  Becket  was  only  a  natural  sequel 
to  what  the  King  had  already  done,  and  most  of  the 
earlier  articles  were  such  as  would  be  sure  to  meet 
with  general  approbation.  But  the  two  which  con- 
cern ceremonies  and  preaching  are  particularly  inter- 

1   Burnet,  iv.  341-6  ;  Wilkius,  iii.  81.5-17. 

-  See  pp.  154-5  ante. 

'•'•  "Sacianicntaries"  were  those  who  denied  Traiisubstantiation  and  under- 
stood "This  is  my  body,"  etc.,  in  a  merely  figurative  sense.  "Anabaptists" 
held  that  those  who  were  baptized  in  infancy  required  to  be  baptized  anew. 


336  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

esting.  The  first  expressly  sanctioned,  till  further 
orders,  the  continuance  of  a  number  of  time-honoured 
usages  till  the  King  saw  fit  to  change  them ;  the 
second,  no  doubt,  gratified  men  of  the  new  school, 
by  inculcating  the  difference  between  things  resting 
on  divine  and  things  resting  on  mere  ecclesiastical 
authority.  By  this  it  might  be  seen,  not  altogether 
obscurely,  that  usages,  for  the  present  sanctioned  or 
tolerated,  might  ere  long  be  abolished  when  the 
King  saw  fit  to  do  so ;  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the 
ceremonies  mentioned  are  now,  with  one  exception, 
altogether  disused,  one  or  two  of  them  even  in  Roman 
Catholic  countries.  Women  are  still  "  purified  "  in 
our  churches  after  child-birth,  though  the  rite  is  now 
differently  named  ;  and  it  was  the  practice  to  offer  a 
"  chrisom "  ^  on  that  occasion  even  in  the  following 
reign,  when  there  was  a  positive  direction  to  that 
effect  in  the  First  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI.  As 
for  the  other  observances  we  cannot  now,  perhaps, 
enter  into  the  spirit  of  them  all ;  but  surely  the 
practice  of  creeping  to  the  Cross  on  Good  Friday 
could  only  have  a  chastening  influence,  most  fitting 
to  the  day  when  it  becomes  us,  more  than  any  day, 
to  think  of  human  frailty  and  of  the  Infinite  Love 
that  died  for  us. 

The  main  thing  to  be  observed,  however,  as  regards 
this  part  of  the  proclamation  is,  that  ceremonies  were 
now  made  to  rest  on  royal  sanction.  This,  of  course, 
was  simply  carrying  the  principle  of  Royal  Supremacy 
one  step  further ;  for,  just  as  ceremonies  which  are 
not  ecclesiastical  maintain  their  hold  by  custom  and 

^  The  "cluisom  "  was  a  white  robe  put  upon  an  infant  at  baptism  by  tlie 
priest.  It  was  offered  up  by  the  mother  when  she  came  to  be  churched  ;  but 
if  the  child  died  previously  it  was  buried  in  the  chrisom  as  a  shroud.  Hence 
"a  chrisom  child  "  was  not  really  an  unbaptized  child  as  many  have  supposed, 
but  a  baptized  one  which  died  within  a  month.  The  word  "chrisom  "  seems 
to  have  been  a  corruption  of  "chrism,"  which  was  properly  the  unction  used 
at  baptism  ;  and  secondarily,  a  fillet  bound  on  the  forehead  to  preserve  the 
holy  oil.  Then  it  was  applied  to  the  white  robe  received  by  the  newly 
baptized. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        337 

not  by  decree,  so  in  the  Church  also  custom  was 
a  fairly  sufficient  warrant  for  them,  except  that  their 
validity  or  expediency  could  always  have  been  re- 
ferred to  the  decision  of  a  papal  authority  which 
was  now  abolished.  But  the  practical  result  of  this 
proclamation  in  making  ceremonies  depend  on  royal 
authority  appears  to  have  been  to  lessen  the  respect 
in  which  many  of  them  were  held,  and  to  raise  up 
a  very  considerable  crop  of  disputes  during  the  next 
three  or  four  years.  Nor  was  a  supplementary  pro- 
clamation, issued  on  the  26th  February  following 
(1539),^  calculated  to  obviate  such  consequences;  for 
it  enjoined  the  bishops  and  clergy  every  Sunday  to 
instruct  the  people  as  to  the  "  right  use  and  effect "  of 
the  ceremonies  used  on  that  particular  day,  whether 
it  were  only  the  significance  of  holy  bread  and  holy 
water,  or  the  reason  for  such  an  observance  as  carry- 
ing candles  on  Candlemas  Day.  It  seemed  as  if  the 
intention  were  to  make  people  rationalists,  whether 
they  were  so  disposed  or  not,  and  to  encourage  them 
to  demand  a  reason  for  everything,  without  yielding, 
as  heretofore,  simply  to  authority  or  custom  when 
there  was  no  substantial  objection  to  it. 

But  another  matter  contained  in  this  supple- 
mentary proclamation  was  that  it  declared  the  King's 
pardon  to  all  persons,  whether  his  subjects  or  aliens, 
who  had  been  seduced  by  Anabaptists  or  Sacrament- 
aries  coming  from  abroad,  and  who  desired  to  return 
to  the  Catholic  Church.  The  King's  Church  was  still 
the  Catholic  Church,  for  there  was  no  breach  of  com- 
munion recognised  in  England. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  since  the  publication  of 
"the  Bishops'  Book"  in  1537  there  had  been  issued 
within  a  year  and  a  half,  first,  a  second  set  of  injunc- 
tions from  the  King's  Vicegerent,  and  then  two  royal 
proclamations  for  the  control  of  various  matters  in  the 
Church.  What  a  multiplicity  of  orders  !  And  was  it 
1  L.  p.,  XIV,  i.  374. 

VOL.  II  z 


3  38   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

safe  to  trust  them  all  equally  ?  "  The  Bishops'  Book  " 
was  only  half  authorised,  and  was,  in  fact,  allowed  to 
remain  on  trial  for  three  years.  The  injunctions  were 
Cromwell's,  but  as  he  was  the  King's  Vicegerent, 
they  apparently  had  full  authority  from  the  Head 
of  the  Church  himself.  The  royal  proclamations 
were  past  dispute ;  but  apart  from  the  injury  they 
did  to  old  traditional  feeling  on  the  subject  of  Becket 
and  his  "  pictures,"  they  contained  nothing  worse 
than  the  mere  foreshadowing  of  a  possibility  of  future 
change.  Still,  on  the  whole,  "  the  Bishops'  Book " 
and  the  proclamations  were  better  obeyed  than  the 
injunctions,  being,  indeed,  far  less  unpopular. 
Unpopu-  For  of  the  unpopularity  of  the   injunctions  we 

theTnj^unc-  havc  vcry  special  evidence.  In  December  1538,  just 
tions.  three  months  after  they  were  issued,  a  circular  was 
sent  out  to  the  Justices  of  the  Peace  throughout  the 
kingdom,  in  which  the  King,  first  of  all,  commends 
their  zeal  in  the  discharge  of  their  duty,  especially 
against  the  maintainers  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome's 
authority.  Their  exertions  in  this  matter  had  kept 
the  country  quiet  for  some  time.  But  now,  it  goes 
on  to  show,  there  were  sundry  parsons  who  "  read  so 
confusely,  hemming  and  hacking  the  Word  of  God 
and  such  our  injunctions  as  we  have  lately  set  forth, 
that  almost  no  man  can  understand  the  true  mean- 
ing of  the  said  injunctions."  They  had  also  got  up 
rumours  positively  to  misrepresent  their  meaning, 
and  had  made  people  think  that  the  keeping  of  parish 
registers  was  ordered  with  a  view  to  the  taxation 
of  christenings,  weddings,  and  burials ;  which  was 
very  far  from  the  King's  mind.  This  had  raised 
an  outcry  that  the  King  was  going  to  take  away  the 
liberties  of  the  realm,  for  the  conservation  of  which, 
as  they  said,  St.  Thomas — that  is  to  say,  Becket — 
died.  The  justices  were  therefore  to  find  out  and 
punish  such  seditious  tale  -  tellers,  and  also  such 
"cankered  parsons"  as  would  only  mumble  the  in- 


CH.  n      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        339 

junctions,  saying  they  were  compelled  to  read  them, 
and  would  then  tell  their  parishioners  to  do  as  they 
liked.  ^     A  document  like  this  requires  no  comment. 

In  fact,  it  is  clear  that  the  injunctions  were  very 
largely  evaded.  In  Warwickshire  Sir  Robert  Mawde, 
parson  of  Whatcott,  read  them  in  his  church  on 
Sunday,  2nd  March  1539,  using  some  very  derisive 
and  unseemly  language  if  the  witnesses  against  him 
reported  truly.  "  This  must  needs  be  conned,"  he 
said,  "  for  by  God's  bones  I  have  read  this  unto  you 
a  hundred  thousand  times,  and  yet  ye  be  never  the 
better.  And  it  is  a  matter  that  is  as  light  to  learn 
as  a  boy  or  a  wench  should  learn  a  ballad  or  a  song, 
and  by  God's  flesh  here  is  an  hundred  words  in  these 
injunctions  where  two  would  serve,  for  I  know  what 
it  meaneth  as  well  as  they  that  made  it ;  for,  lo,  it 
Cometh  in  like  a  rhyme,  a  jest,  or  a  ballad."  We  are 
not  surprised  to  hear  that  there  were  other  things 
against  this  parson.  He  received  '*  valiant  beggars  " 
in  his  house,  and  played  cards  with  them.  He  had 
never  read  the  Gospel  nor  the  Epistle  in  English. 
He  had  only  once  recited  the  Bishop's  injunctions  and 
the  King's  commandments  for  the  abolition  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome's  power ;  he  said  the  former  were 
too  hard  to  learn,  and  as  to  the  latter,  there  was 
never  a  man  in  Westminster  Hall  that  would  read 
so  much  for  twenty  nobles.^ 

This  man's  bishop  was  Latimer,  but  he  was 
examined  before  three  local  gentlemen  under  a  com- 
mission from  Cromwell,  and  committed  to  Warwick 
gaol.  No  doubt,  he  was  but  a  specimen  of  a  class 
of  rollicking,  irreverent  parsons,  whose  ways  went 
far    to     excuse    the    Lollardy    (or    Puritanism,^   as 

1  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  1171.  2  X.  P.,  XIV.  i.  542, 

^  Puritanism,  as  perhaps  we  shall  find  hereafter,  was  but  a  development 
of  the  earlier  Lollardy,  founding  itself  in  the  same  appeal  to  Scripture  and 
the  same  disregard  of  antiquity  in  any  other  form  ;  endeavouring  also  to 
make  saints  of  Sir  John  Oldcastle  and  other  insubordinate  personages  ;  cur- 
tailing the  people's  holidays,  and  insisting  merely  on  the  observance  of  one 
day  in  the  week  as  of  Scriptural  obligation  ;   calling  Sunday  Sabbath  and 


340  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

we  might  call  it)  which  was  now  again  gaining 
strength. 

In  Salisbury  Cathedral,  on  the  afternoon  of  Easter 
Day,  an  awkward  incident  occurred.  The  people  were 
kneeling  and  kissing  an  image  of  Christ  standing  on 
an  altar  on  the  north  side  of  the  choir,  when  John 
Goodall,  the  vice -bailiff,  appeared  and  ordered  one 
of  the  priests  to  take  it  away.  The  King  had  com- 
manded that  no  such  kissing  of  images  was  to  be 
allowed  but  only  creeping  to  the  cross  and  kissing 
it  on  Good  Friday  and  Easter  morning,  both  of  which 
were  now  past,  for  it  was  three  o'clock  afternoon. 
The  priest  hesitated  to  obey,  knowing,  what  Goodall 
did  not  know,  that  the  consecrated  host  was  within  the 
image ;  and  Goodall  then  ordered  his  servant  to  take 
it  down.  On  this  the  mayor  and  aldermen  wrote  to 
complain  of  Goodall,  denouncing  him  as  a  heretic 
who  dishonoured  the  Sacrament  and  despised  the 
King's  proclamation  for  the  observance  of  all  laud- 
able ceremonies  till  further  orders.  But  Bishop 
Shaxton  wrote  in  his  defence  to  Cromwell,  assuring 
him  that  no  man  was  more  zealous  in  promoting 
obedience,  both  to  the  injunctions  and  the  King's 
proclamation  ;  and  he  could  answer  for  it  the  man 
had  no  heretical  opinion  of  the  Sacrament,  but 
detested  Sacramentaries.^  A  little  later  John  Good- 
all  flattered  himself  that  though  he  had  sustained 
displeasure  "  for  declaring  the  manifest  enormity  of 
the  clergy  in  the  Close  of  Sarum,"  he  had  done  some 
good ;  for  now  the  residentiaries  not  only  preached, 
but  had  a  chapter  of  the  New  or  Old  Testament 
They  are  read  at  dinner  time.  But  from  Sarum  westward,  he 
obeyed    ^^^^'  ^^^  iujunctious  wcrc  uot  obscrvcd,  and  would 

turning  that  Sabbath  into  a  day  of  gloom.  It  has  made  religion,  even  to  our 
own  times,  far  too  much  a  mere  Sunday  matter.  But  its  faults  arose  out  of 
its  very  merits  ;  for  it  was  at  least  marked  by  a  strong  sense  of  principle,  of 
which  there  is  always,  unfortunately,  too  great  a  lack  in  established  or  con- 
ventional religion. 

1  Z.  P.,  XIV.  i.  777-8. 


cH.n      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        341 

never  be  until  Cromwell  sent  down  a  commission  of 
inquiry.^ 

Then  we  find  justices  in  various  places  reporting 
that  many  of  the  clergy  had  not  bibles  in  their 
churches  as  required,  and  did  not  preach  as  they 
were  directed  by  the  injunctions ;  ^  or  that  some 
particular  parson  has  left  the  word  Papa  in  his 
mass -book,  and  the  name  of  Thomas  Becket  and 
whole  legends  about  him  in  his  breviary  and  other 
books. ^  Even  in  Kent  the  injunctions  were  ill 
obeyed,  and,  as  Dr.  Henry  Goderick  complained,  no 
sermons  were  "  sincerely  "  preached  except  by  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer  and  his  chaplains.  At  Ashford,  on 
the  proclamation  about  Becket,  "  they  transposed  his 
image  in  the  church,  took  the  cross  out  of  his  hands 
and  put  in  a  woolcomb,  till  they  saw  that  Mr.  Gold- 
well  caused  all  Becket's  images  in  his  parish  church 
to  be  broken  and  put  down."  This  was  intended  to 
be  a  compromise,  but  Dr.  Goderick  told  them  that 
transposing  would  not  serve. ^ 

The  open  Bible  in  church  was  a  subject  of  trouble 
in   Calais,  as  we  have  seen  that  at  another  time  it 
was   in   London.      On    a    Saturday,    apparently  the 
12th  April,^  one  Tornaye  or  Torner,  a  soldier  of  the  a  soldier 
garrison  at  Calais,  was  reading  the  Bible  kept  for  sntiewuh 
general  use  in   Our  Lady   church  to  all  who  cared  acom- 
to  listen.     Gregory  Botolf,  one  of  the  Calais  clergy,  ^u^rdiT  '^ 
after  evensong   in   the   choir,   came   into   the  circle 
of  listeners,  and  found  that  he  read  first  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  and  then  turned  to  the  translator's 
introduction    to   that    Epistle    (Tyndale's    too    cele- 
brated prologue,  which  was  founded  upon  Luther's), 
returning    afterwards    to    the    text.      Botolf    went 

^  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  894.  "^  L.  p.,  xiv,  ii.  App.  6, 

3  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  821.  ^  L.P.,  XIV.  i.  1053-54. 

^  Gregory  Botolf s  letter,  L.  P.,  xiv.  i.  1351,  is  clearly  much  earlier  than 
July,  the  date  in  which  it  has  been  placed.  If  "the  12th  inst."  was  really 
a  Saturday,  that  would  suit  April  as  well  as  July,  and  letter  1009  certainly 
suggests  that  Cromwell  had  been  written  to  on  the  subject  some  time  before 
the  15th  May.  . 


342   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

up  to  him  and  said  aloud,  but  not  with  unseemly 
loudness,  that  he  ought  to  inform  his  hearers  wheu 
he  was  reading  Scripture  and  when  an  exposition. 
Torner  resented  the  remark,  and  was  disposed  to 
argue ;  and  at  last,  Botolf,  having  a  Testament  "  of 
large  volume  "  in  his  hand,  spoke  aloud  to  the  con- 
gregation, saying,  "  Friends,  I  shall  read  unto  you  the 
same  thing  wherein  he  left,  whereby  ye  shall,  accord- 
ing to  the  translator's  meaning,  the  better  understand 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Eomans  at  all  times 
hereafter,"  and  he  continued  for  nearly  an  hour.^ 
The  dispute  was  awkward,  and  to  prevent  similar 
disturbances,  the  deputy,  Lord  Lisle,  gave  orders 
that  the  Bible  should  be  read  no  more  during  mass 
or  service  time.  But  this  only  raised  a  murmur 
among  those  who  "  favoured  God's  Word  "  that  there 
should  be  any  time  forbidden  for  such  an  exercise ; 
and  Cromwell  was  informed  about  it.^  To  put 
a  stop  to  religious  altercations  at  Calais,  Cranmer 
wrote  to  Lord  Lisle  promising  to  do  his  best  to  find 
a  discreet  parish  priest  and  send  him  thither  as  his 
commissary,  with  instructions  to  suffer  none  to  preach 
out  of  his  cure  without  authority  either  from  the 
King  or  the  Archbishop.  "  As  concerning  such 
persons,"  he  added,  "  as  in  time  of  divine  service 
do  read  the  Bible,  they  do  much  abuse  the  King's 
Grace's  intent  and  meaning  in  his  Grace's  injunctions 
and  proclamations ;  which  permitteth  the  Bible  to 
be  read,  not  to  allure  great  multitudes  of  people 
together,  nor  thereby  to  interrupt  the  time  of  prayer, 
meditation  and  thanks  to  be  given  unto  Almighty 
God,  which,  specially  in  divine  service,  is,  and  of 
congruence  ought  to  be,  used  ;  but  that  the  same 
be  done  and  read  in  time  convenient,  privately,  for 
the  condition  and  amendment  of  the  lives  both  of 
the  readers  and  of  such  hearers  as  cannot  themselves 
read,   and   not   in   contempt  and  hindrance  of  any 

1  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  1351.  -^  L.  P.,  XIV.  i.  1009. 


CH.  II      THE  MAKING  OF   FORMULARIES        343 

divine  service  or  laudable  ceremony  used  in  the 
Church ;  nor  that  any  such  reading  should  be  used 
in  the  Church  as  in  a  common  school,  expounding 
and  interpreting  Scriptures,  unless  it  be  by  such  as 
shall  have  authority  to  preach  and  read."  ^ 

Thus  it  would  seem  that  the  effects  of  Cromwell's 
injunctions  had  not  been  greatly  favourable  to  re- 
ligious peace.  As  for  "  the  Bishops'  Book,"  it  seems 
to  have  been  generally  obeyed  as  being  the  work  of  the 
bishops,  though  some,  here  and  there,  may  have  done 
like  Heliar,  parson  of  Warblington  in  Hampshire, 
who  "  left  out  the  declaration  of  purpose  "  when  he 
read  it.^  But  the  three  years'  licence  for  the  book 
expired  in  1540  ;  and  in  June  of  that  year  prepara-  Prepara- 
tions were  made  for  the  composition  of  a  more  n°i'f°rm\- 
authoritative  formulary.  Seventeen  questions  were  lary. 
disseminated  by  the  King's  authority  among  bishops 
and  divines  as  to  the  nature  of  a  Sacrament,  first 
according  to  Scripture,  and  secondly  according  to 
ancient  authors ;  then  how  many  there  were  by 
Scripture  or  by  ancient  authors ;  whether  the  term 
Sacrament  should  be  applied  only  to  the  Seven,  and 
whether  the  Seven  Sacraments  were  found  in  any  old 
authors  or  not.  And  so  on,  some  of  the  questions 
touching  upon  the  particular  powers  of  bishops, 
priests,  and  kings.  The  answers  to  these  questions 
are  preserved  in  MS.  at  Lambeth,  and  as  they  have 
been  printed  by  Burnet,^  I  need  not  discuss  them  in 
detail.  But  we  must  again  note  the  effect  of 
the  new  royal  papacy  in  the  answer  given  by  the 
most  responsible  of  all  the  bishops — the  Primate  of 
all  England.  Cranmer  wrote  his  answer  to  each  of 
the  questions  seriatim,  and  appended  at  the  foot 
not   only  his   signature,  "  T.   Cantuarien.,"  but   also 

1  Cranmer's  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  391  ;  Z.  P.,  xiv.  i.  1264. 

^  L.  P.,  XIII.  ii.  817  (p.  326). 

^  History  of  the  Reformation,  iv.  443  sq.,  and  vi.  241  sq.  (Pocock's  ed.)  ;  or 
(for  any  edition),  Records,  Pt.  I.,  Book  iii.,  No.  xxi.,  and  Pt.  III.,  Book  in., 
No.  Ixix. 


344  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

these  words  in  his  own  handwriting :  "  This  is  mine 
opinion  and  sentence  at  this  present,  which  I  do 
not  temerariously  define,  and  do  remit  the  judgment 
thereof  wholly  unto  your  Majesty."  ^ 

There  is  something  in  this  humility  that  belongs 
neither  to  an  earlier  nor  to  a  later  age.  Nor,  indeed, 
was  it  shared,  or  at  least  avowed  so  plainly,  by 
very  many  contemporaries ;  so  that  one  is  almost 
inclined  to  call  it  Cranmer's  own.  But  the  feeling 
of  the  great  body  of  the  nation  seems  certainly  to 
have  been  that  if  the  King  of  England  was  disposed 
to  take  upon  himself  the  spiritual  rule  of  his  kingdom 
as  well  as  the  temporal,  he  must  be  allowed  to  do 
so ;  the  responsibility  lay  with  him  and  not  with 
his  subjects.  Even  his  bishops  had  yielded  the  point, 
and  there  was  generally  nothing  more  to  be  said. 
Cranmer's  But  Craumcr,  who  was  a  real  theologian,  forced 
liftority  ^"^o^i^^*  l^is  will  into  a  position  of  the  highest  re- 
sponsibility, had  clearly  thought  out  the  whole 
question  in  his  own  mind ;  and  Royal  Supremacy 
was  a  doctrine  which  he  fervently  believed  all  his 
days,  till  at  the  last,  driven  from  point  to  point 
to  make  fuller  recantations  before  his  end,  he  for 
one  brief  interval  repudiated  it  and  some  other 
doctrines,  only  to  make  amends  at  the  stake  by  con- 
fessing sadly  that  he  had  belied  his  conscience  to 
save  his  life. 

Royal  Supremacy  was,  indeed,  to  him  what  Papal 
Supremacy  was  to  others.  A  kingdom  could  not 
stand  if  not  founded  in  righteousness ;  and,  fearful  as 
the  acts  of  Henry  VIH.  undoubtedly  were,  there  was 
this,  at  least,  in  him,  that  in  spite  of  his  self-will 
and  ferocity,  he  always  felt  some  foundation  in  sound 
principles  necessary  even  for  his  own  safety.  So, 
too,  Cranmer  felt  that  obedience  to  this  high  power 
was  a  duty ;  and  even  if  his  king  had  been  like  the 
unjust  judge  who  feared  not  God,  neither  regarded 

^  Cranmer's  Miscellaneous  Writings,  p.  117  (Parker  Soc). 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        345 

man,  yet  the  clamour  of  the  importunate  widow 
and  the  respectful  submission  of  the  Church  would 
establish  truth  and  justice  in  the  end.  But  Henry 
after  all  was  not  altogether  an  unjust  judge.  He 
had  always  acknowledged  high  principles  ;  he  thought 
somewhat  himself  about  theology,  and  could  form  his 
own  opinion — at  least  in  things  put  forward  by  his 
divines — what  beliefs  seemed  to  have  a  sure  resting- 
place  in  men's  hearts  and  what  others  were  less  firmly 
held.  He  was  not  going  to  frame  a  new  theology  for 
his  subjects,  or  define  old  principles  anew  without  full 
consultation  with  those  whose  business  it  was  to 
advise  him.  Very  far  from  it.  And  to  the  ultimate 
judicial  opinion  of  such  an  authority  even  the  Primate 
of  all  England  was  prepared  to  bow. 

Bishop  Bonner's  opinion  was  given  with  exactly 
the  same  deference,  although,  just  because  he  was  not 
Primate,  there  was  no  necessity  in  his  case  to  refer 
to  the  ultimate  control  of  royal  authority.  What  he 
wrote  at  the  foot  of  his  answers  was :  "  Ita  mihi, 
Londoniensi  episcopo,  pro  hoc  tempore  dicendum 
videtur,  salvo  judicio  melioris  sentencics,  cui  me 
prompte  et  humiliter  suhjicio."  ^  The  same  thing 
is  implied  in  the  answer  of  Dr.  George  Day,  Provost 
of  King's  College,  Cambridge,  who  wrote  underneath 
it,  "  Opiniones  non  assertiones^  The  questions  raised 
were  in  great  part  new,  and  divines  naturally  gave 
their  opinions  with  some  deference.  But  that  Cranmer 
could  hold  his  own  with  the  King  is  clearly  enough 
shown  by  the  criticisms  which  he  made  on  a  number 
of  the  textual  emendations  proposed  by  the  King  in 
The  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man  ;  for,  while  he 
passed  many  things  as  unobjectionable,  he  declared 
many  others  to  be  superfluous,  and  it  appears  that  his 
objections  were  listened  to.^ 

But  even  while  these  answers  were  being  returned 

1  i.  p.,  XV.  826  (6). 
'^  See  Cranmei's  MisceUancous  Writings,  pp.  83-114. 


346  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Change  on  a  great  change  was  taking  place.  Cromwell's  career 
death!^''^^^  as  the  King's  Vicegerent  was  at  an  end,  and  he  was 
lying  a  prisoner  within  the  Tower,  soon  to  meet  the 
fate  of  an  attainted  traitor.  After  he  was  gone  the 
King  was  not  altogether  comfortable  about  events 
abroad.  There  was  amity  between  the  Emperor  and 
France ;  and  there  was  some  fear  that  the  Lutherans 
of  Germany,  whom  the  Emperor  had  been  endeavour- 
ing to  conciliate  by  repeated  Diets,  might  at  length 
come  to  agreement  with  the  Catholics.  This  would 
have  been  disastrous  to  Henry,  and  it  was  apparently 
to  prevent  this,  quite  as  much  as  to  preserve  the 
Emperor's  friendship  to  himself,  that  he  sent  over 
Gardiner's  Gardiner,  a  firm  adherent  of  the  old  theology,  as 
Ratisbon°  ^^^  ambassador  to  Charles  V.,  with  instructions  to 
follow  him  to  Ratisbon,  where  the  Diet  was  to  be 
held.  The  German  Protestants  had  by  this  time 
ceased  to  expect  any  good  from  the  King  of  England. 
The  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  and  the  burning  of 
Robert  Barnes  showed  clearly  that  he  was  no  real 
friend  of  their  religion,  so  they  could  no  longer 
be  used  as  confederates  against  the  Emperor.  But 
Germany  might  still  be  kept  in  a  turmoil  if  the 
Catholics  were  strongly  urged  not  to  compromise 
matters  with  them ;  and  this  was  an  object  which 
Gardiner  could  most  conscientiously  promote — though 
not  from  any  desire  on  his  part  to  keep  Germany  in 
a  turmoil.  The  Emperor,  in  truth,  was  not  at  that 
time  particularly  anxious  for  the  visit  of  such  an 
able  English  diplomatist,  but  could  not  avoid  seeing 
him  at  Namur  just  after  Christmas,  and  letting  him 
follow  to  Ratisbon  in  the  beginning  of  1541. 

Gardiner's  despatches  home  seem  to  have  had  a 
very  sensible  effect  on  the  King's  policy,  and  the  men 
who  had  been  Cromwell's  agents  were  more  out  of 
favour  than  ever.  Diplomatists  in  Flanders  and  in 
Germany  were  at  first  doubtful  how  to  meet  this 
emissary  of   a  heretical   king ;    and    when    he    came 


cH.n      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        347 

to  an  interview  with  Granvelle  and  complained  of 
the  Emperor's  coldness  towards  Henry,  the  Imperial 
minister  in  reply  told  him  that  the  Emperor  had 
treated  his  master  even  better  than  he  deserved. 
Had  not  the  King  divorced  the  Emperor's  aunt 
(Katharine  of  Aragon),  even  in  contempt  of  that 
papal  authority  to  which  all  Christian  princes  were 
bound  to  show  deference  ?  Yet  the  Emperor  had 
several  times  offered,  if  he  would  only  agree  once 
more  to  be  obedient  to  the  Holy  See,  to  sue  to 
the  Pope  for  his  pardon  ;  and  he  was  willing  even 
now  to  intercede  for  him  with  the  Holy  Father, 
especially  as  that  wicked  minister,  Cromwell,  had 
been  removed,  who  was  the  chief  cause  of  evil. 
How  could  Gardiner  tax  the  Emperor  with  coldness 
to  his  master  ?  ^ 

Gardiner  was  perplexed  how  to  answer.     He  could 
not  deny  that  Cromwell's  influence  had  been  very 
bad,  and  he  seemed  to  admit  that  there  was  a  great 
deal  of  truth  in  what   Granvelle  had  said ;    but  it 
was  treason  in  England  even  to  suggest  such  a  thing 
as  the  King's  reconciliation  to  Rome.     Granvelle  had 
quite  turned  the  tables  on  the  ambassador,  and  made 
it  appear,  as  was  really  the  fact  at  this  time,  that 
the  Emperor's   friendship  was    even    more    valuable 
to  Henry  than  Henry's  was   to  the   Emperor.     So 
he  wrote  to   Chapuys,   the   Imperial  ambassador  in  Oranveiie 
England,   to  do   what  Gardiner  could  not  do,  that  "^^^''t'^ 
is  to  say,  exhort  the  Kmg  to  let  the  Emperor  plead  the  Em- 
for  him  and  make  his  peace  with  the  Pope.     And  f^tTrces- 
this   Chapuys   undoubtedly   did,    not   without   good  sion  for 
diplomatic  results  at  least.      For  within  six  weeks  Rome"^'^^ 
Gardiner  had  a  reply  from  the  King,  instructing  him 
to  thank  Granvelle  for  his  offer  to  get  the  Emperor 
to  intercede  for  Henry  with  the  Pope,  and  Granvelle 
told  the  nuncio  Morone  that  he  hoped  good  would 
come  of  it."     Two  months  later,  when  some  approach 

1  L.  p.,  XVI.  548.  2  Z.  p.,  XVI.  67R. 


348   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

seemed  to  be  making  in  the  Diet  of  Ratisbon  towards 
religious  peace,  he  even  told  another  papal  messenger 
that,  if  only  the  Protestants  could  be  got  to  con- 
cede some  points,  he  was  informed  by  the  English 
ambassadors  (for  besides  Gardiner,  whose  mission  was 
temporary,  there  was  Sir  Henry  Knyvet,  who  was 
to  be  resident)  that  their  King  would  permit  the 
Emperor  to  undertake  his  reconciliation  to  the  Pope ; 
and  if  England  returned  to  the  Church,  the  Lutherans 
would  probably  be  entirely  submissive.^ 

So,  at  least,  the  papal  messenger  understood 
matters,  and  he  was  not  altogether  wrong.  But  he 
should  not  have  spoken  of  the  English  ambassadors 
in  the  plural  number ;  for  it  was  only  from  Gardiner, 
not  from  Knyvet,  as  we  shall  see  presently,  that 
Granvelle  could  have  got  any  such  impression  as 
that  Henry  would  allow  the  Emperor  to  undertake 
his  reconciliation  at  Rome.  Still  the  fact  appears 
indisputable  that  at  this  time  the  King  was  positively 
thinking — not,  perhaps,  that  he  would  of  himself  go 
so  far  (for  the  chapter  of  accidents  might  probably 
save  him  from  such  humiliation) — but  that  he  might, 
perhaps,  be  compelled,  as  a  matter  of  policy,  to 
retrace  his  past  steps  and  seek  peace  once  more 
with  the  Holy  See ;  and  he  was  glad  to  know  that 
if  he  should  be  driven  to  such  a  course,  he  might 
rely  on  the  Emperor's  good  offices  to  smooth  his 
way.  At  least,  by  suggesting  such  a  possibility  he 
enabled  Gardiner  the  more  easily  to  lay  the  founda- 
tion of  a  closer  political  alliance  between  him  and  the 
Emperor ;  and  as  soon  as  he  had  done  so  Gardiner 
was  recalled.^ 

There  is  no  doubt  that  Henry  greatly  appreciated 
the  value  of  Gardiner's  services,  yet  apparently 
Gardiner  himself  was  not  without  grave  apprehen- 
sions as  to  the  reception  he  might  meet  with  on  his 

'  L.  P.,  XVI.  870.     See  Baronius,  xxxii.  577-8. 
2  L.  P.,  XVI.  910,  941  (p.  454). 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        349 

return.  "  The  Bishop  of  Winchester  is  recalled," 
wrote  Morone  from  Ratisbon  to  Cardinal  Farnese, 
"  and  fears  for  his  life  for  persuading  the  King  to 
return  to  the  Church."  ^  This  could  not  have  been 
exactly  the  case,  as  we  have  seen  already  how 
cautious  Gardiner  was  about  the  matter.  But  an 
awkward  incident  had  occurred,  the  true  nature  of  An  awk- 
which  we  can  understand  perfectly  from  the  pages  ?'^^'J  , 
of  Foxe.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  what  passed 
between  Gardiner  and  Granvelle  on  the  subject  of 
reconciliation  with  Rome  was  of  a  very  confidential 
character  indeed,  and  how  far  Gardiner  himself  dared 
to  report  it  to  his  Sovereign  we  do  not  know.  It 
was  through  Granvelle's  writing  to  Chapuys,  and 
Chapuys's  exhortations,  that  the  matter  was  really 
moved  to  the  King  himself;  after  which  Gardiner, 
of  course  in  the  strictest  privacy,  was  commissioned 
to  thank  Granvelle  as  already  mentioned.  Out  of 
this,  it  appears,  came  other  private  communications ; 
and  one  day  an  Italian  banker  named  Lodovico  was 
charged  by  the  Legate  Contarini,  then  on  the  point 
of  leaving  Ratisbon,  to  go  to  the  English  ambassador 
and  ask  him  for  an  answer  to  the  Pope's  letters 
which  the  legate  had  delivered  to  him.  The  man, 
unfortunately,  communicated  the  request  to  William 
Wolfe,  Sir  Henry  Knyvet's  steward,  to  convey  to  his 
master.  Of  course  the  ambassador  intended  was  not 
Knyvet,  but  his  colleague,  and  the  message  ought 
to  have  been  delivered  to  Gardiner  himself  in  the 
strictest  secrecy.  But  Lodovico,  not  being  an  Eng- 
lishman, could  not  imagine  how  dangerous  the  matter 
was,  and  he  was  under  the  impression  that  Wolfe  was 
Gardiner's  servant.  Knyvet  thus  learned  that  his 
colleague  was  receiving  communications  from  Rome, 
and  he  could  not  but  feel  bound  to  inform  against 
him.  The  matter  naturally  gave  rise  to  a  great  deal 
of  gossip,  and  it  is  not  wonderful  that  Foxe,  with  his 

1  L.  p.,  XVI,  968. 


3  50  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

invariable  animus  against  Gardiner,  records  it  as  one 
of  the  "  causes  that  moved  the  King  to  suspect  his 
fidelity  towards  his  godly  proceedings  in  religion."^ 
Gardiner  But,  it  uccd  hardly  be  said,  there  was  never  any 
Tefved^on  ^'^^^  doubt  about  Gardiner's  feeling  in  religious 
his  return  matters,  and  if  anybody  misunderstood  his  conduct 
^°'"®"  it  was  certainly  not  the  King,^  from  whom,  on  his 
return,  he  met  with  a  very  good  reception.  He  took 
his  place  again  at  the  Council  table,  and  even  the 
painful  disclosures  about  Katharine  Howard,  whom 
he  examined  on  the  subject  of  her  misdemeanours, 
only  proved  how  high  he  stood  in  the  King's  con- 
fidence. It  was  next  year,  1542,  that  Convocation 
condemned  "  the  Great  Bible,"  and  Gardiner  read 
out  his  catalogue  of  words  and  phrases  from  the 
Vulgate,  which  he  desired  to  see  retained  as  nearly 
as  possible  in  their  Latin  forms.  But  "  the  Great 
Bible,"  as  we  have  seen,  was  retained  in  use  in  spite 
of  Convocation, 
convoca-  In  the  year  following,  1543,  the  Convocation  of 
ms™  Canterbury  met  on  the  16th  February,  and,  after 
the  two  Houses  had  voted  a  heavy  subsidy  to  the 
King,  the  Prolocutor  exhibited  some  homilies  com- 
posed by  certain  prelates,  which  were  intended  as  an 
aid  and  stay  to  ignorant  preachers ;  but  their  use 
was  not  then  authorised.  On  the  21st  the  Arch- 
bishop intimated  that  it  was  the  King's  pleasure 
"  that  all  mass  books,  antiphoners,  portuises  in  the 
Church  of  England  should  be  newly  examined,  cor- 
rected, reformed,  and  castigated  from  all  manner  of 
mention  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome's  name,  from  all 
apocryphas,  feigned  legends,  superstitious  orations, 
collects,  versicles,  and  responses  ;  that  the  names  and 

1  Ads  and  Monuments,  vi.  165-8  ;  vii.  588-91.  i 

^  According  to  the  deposition  of  Sir  Thomas  Chaloner  some  years  later, 
serious  disputes  arose  about  this  matter  between  Sir  Henry  Knyvet  and 
Gardiner  at  the  Emperor's  Court  for  about  a  fortnight  or  twenty  days,  "till, 
at  last,  by  letters  from  the  King's  Majesty,  both  the  Bishop  and  Sir  Henry 
were  commanded  to  lay  all  things  underfoot,  and  to  cease  that  matter, 
joining  together  in  service  as  before." — Foxe,  vi.  168. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        351 

memories  of  all  saints  which  be  not  mentioned  in  the 
Scripture  or  authentical  doctors  should  be  abolished 
and  put  out  of  the  same  books  and  calendars ;  and 
that  the  services  should  be  made  out  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  other  authentic  doctors."  Also  that,  to 
prevent  further  negligence  in  the  matter,  "  the 
examination  and  correction  of  the  said  books  of  ser- 
vice "  were  to  be  committed  to  the  Bishops  of  Sarum 
and  Ely  (Capon  and  Goodrich)  "  taking  to  each  of 
them  three  of  the  Lower  House  such  as  should  be 
appointed  for  that  purpose.  But  this,"  it  is  added, 
"  the  Lower  House  released."  ^  They  were  not 
anxious,  apparently,  to  assist  the  two  subservient 
bishops  in  defacing  a  number  of  ancient  MSS.,  which 
are  disfigured  to  this  day  with  the  word  "  Pope " 
crossed  out  wherever  it  occurs,  and  the  title  "  Bishop 
of  Rome  "  interlined  in  place  of  it. 

It  was  further  ordered  "  that  every  Sunday  and 
holy  day  throughout  the  year,  the  curate  of  every 
parish  church,  after  the  Te  Deura  and  Magnificat, 
should  openly  read  unto  the  people  one  chapter  of 
the  New  Testament  in  English  without  exposition, 
and  when  the  New  Testament  was  read  over,  then  to 
begin  the  Old."  We  have  heard  in  later  times  of  the 
principle  of  reading  the  Bible  "  without  note  or  com- 
ment," as,  indeed,  the  practice  itself  is  common 
enough  without  any  orders  on  the  subject.  But 
whenever  such  orders  are  made,  surely  the  question, 
"  Understandest  thou  what  thou  readest  ? "  should 
also  be  prohibited. 

The  Synod  then,  after  passing  the  Bill  of  Subsidy, 
put  forward,  for  presentation  to  the  King,  four 
petitions,  as  follows  : — 

"1.  For  the  Ecclesiastical  laws  of  this  realm  to 
be  made,  according  to  the  Statute  made  in  the  fifth 
(error  for  25th  ^)  year  of  his  most  gracious  reign. 

1  Wilkins,  iii.  863. 

"  The  Act  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19,  passed  after  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy, 
forbade  their  making  ordinances  or  canons  in  time  coming  without  the  King  s 


352   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

"  2.  For  remedy  to  be  provided  by  his  Highness 
for  the  ungodly  and  unlawful  solemnisation  of 
marriages  frequently  used,  or  abused,  in  the  chapel 
or  hospital  of  Bethlehem  without  Bishopsgate. 

"  3.  For  an  Act  of  Parliament  to  be  made  this 
session  for  the  union  and  corporation  of  small  and 
exile  benefices  through  this  realm,  which  for  small- 
ness  of  fruits  be  not  able  to  find  a  priest,  and  so  rest 
untaken  by  parson,  vicar,  or  curate. 

"  4.  For  some  good  order  and  provision  to  be 
made  by  his  Majesty  and  established  by  Parliament 
for  due  and  true  payment  of  tithes,  both  predial  and 
personal,  throughout  this  realm,  for  quietness  of  all 
persons  and  discharge  of  consciences  of  the  lay- 
men," etc.^ 

Thus  we  see  that  the  Church  under  bondage  was 
still  striving  to  do  its  best.  On  the  17th  [March? 
— ejusdem  mensis  in  the  record,  but  apparently 
some  passages  have  been  left  out]  the  Synod  was 
adjourned  till  the  4th  April.  But  nothing  important 
was  done  till  the  20th,  when  steps  were  taken  in  the 
preparation  of  the  third  Formulary.  That  day  there 
were  laid  before  the  prelates  the  Lord's  Prayer  and 
Revision  of  the  Angclic  Salutatiou  with  the  English  Commentary 
or  interpretation  contained  in  the  Institution ;  and 
after  these  had  been  examined  by  the  Archbishop 
and  by  Bishops  Gardiner,  Heath,  and  Thirlby,  the 
Prolocutor  entered,  and  they  were  delivered  to  him 
for  the  consideration  of  the  Lower  House.  Next 
day  the  first  five  Commandments  of  the  Decalogue, 
with  the  English  Commentary,  were  in  like  manner 
considered  and  delivered  to  the  Prolocutor.  On  the 
24th  the  remaining  five  Commandments  were  dealt 
with,  and  likewise  delivered  to  the  Prolocutor, 
together   with   the    articles    on    Baptism    and    the 

assent,  but  allowed  the  King  to  nominate,  when  he  was  so  pleased,  thirty-two 
persons,  one-half  lay  and  one-half  clerical,  to  examine  the  canons  already 
enacted,  so  that  those  approved  by  them  and  the  King  should  still  be 
enforced.  ^  Wilkius,  u.s. 


the  Institu- 
tion. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF  FORMULARIES        353 

Eucharist.  So,  at  least,  it  stands  on  the  record ; 
but  the  Eucharist,  certainly,  was  not  fully  considered 
that  day.  The  whole  of  these  articles  had  been 
examined  by  the  Archbishop  and  by  Bishops  Thirlby, 
Heath,  Salcot,  and  Skipp.  Thirlby,  who  in  1540 
had  been  made  Bishop  of  the  new  See  of  West- 
minster, and  Heath,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  were  the 
only  two  of  these  who  were  really  of  the  old  school, 
though  even  they,  of  course,  had  accepted  the 
Supremacy.  Of  the  subservient  Salcot,  or  Capon, 
as  Bishop  of  Bangor,  I  have  already  spoken  ;  he 
had  been  since  translated  to  Salisbury  in  Shaxton's 
room.  Skipp  had  been  Queen  Anne  Boleyn's 
almoner,  but  was  not  made  a  bishop  till  after  her 
fall,  and  he  now  filled  the  See  of  Hereford.  So  there 
was  a  large  infusion  of  the  "  New  Learning  "  in  the 
Committee  by  which  the  matter  was  decided.  Next 
day  the  same  bishops  examined  and  revised  the 
articles  on  the  Sacraments  of  the  Eucharist,  Matri- 
mony, Penance,  Orders,  Confirmation,  and  Extreme 
Unction,  and  delivered  them  to  the  Prolocutor,  desir- 
ing to  have  the  judgment  of  the  Lower  House  upon 
them  on  Friday  following,  the  27th  April. 

On  that  day  the  Archbishop  and  the  Bishops  of 
Winchester,  Rochester,  and  Westminster,  examined 
and  approved  an  English  exposition  of  the  word 
"  Faith"  (probably  Cranmer's  own  composition),  and 
of  the  twelve  articles  of  the  Creed.  In  the  afternoon 
were  read  tracts  upon  Justification,  Good  Works, 
and  Prayer  for  the  Dead,  which  were  all  delivered 
to  the  Prolocutor  and  brought  back  on  the  Monday 
following  (30th  April).  On  which  day,  after  an 
article  on  Free  Will  had  been  read  and  discussed  by 
the  bishops,  it  also  was  delivered  to  the  Prolocutor 
to  be  read  by  him  to  the  Lower  House ;  and  the 
Lower  House  returned  the  whole  treatise,  with 
expressions  of  cordial  approval  and  great  thanks  to 
the  bishops  for  all  the  labours  and  pains  they  had 
VOL.  II  2  a 


3  54   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

bestowed  upon  the  subject.      The  Convocation  was 
then  prorogued.^ 

The  final  result  of  all  these  deliberations  was 
The  book  givcu  to  the  world  on  the  29th  May  in  the  printed 
of  Mces-  treatise  entitled,  "A  Necessary  Doctrine  and  Erudi- 
Doctrine.  tiou  for  any  Christian  Man ;  set  forth  by  the  King's 
Majesty  of  England."  It  was  essentially  "  the 
Bishops'  Book "  remodelled,  and  might  fairly  now 
be  called,  as  it  was  called,  "  the  King's  Book,"  not 
only  because  it  was  "  set  forth  "  by  him,  but  because, 
if  not  the  substance,  at  least  the  turns  of  expres- 
sion, were  in  many  cases  modified  more  or  less  in 
accordance  with  the  King's  own  suggestion.  Henry 
was  quite  at  home  in  theology — at  least  in  its  verbal 
implements  ;  and  he  had  already  shown,  even  in  deal- 
ing with  the  compositions  of  German  divines,  how  he 
could  alter  and  modify  phraseology  as  well  as  argue, 
which  all  his  own  divines  knew  that  he  could  do  very 
well.^ 

Accordingly,  like  a  true  Defender  of  the  Faith,  he 
prefaced  the  new  Manual  with  an  address  to  his 
faithful  and  loving  subjects,  stating  that  he,  in  the 
time  of  darkness  and  ignorance,  had  striven  to  purge 
his  realm  of  hypocrisy  and  superstition  ;  but  as  now, 
in  the  time  of  knowledge,  the  Devil  had  attempted 
to  return  into  the  house  purged  and  cleansed,  with 
seven  worse  spirits,  and  people's  hearts  were  inclined 
"  to  sinister  understanding  of  the  Scripture,  pre- 
sumption, arrogancy,  carnal  liberty,  and  contention," 
he  was  constrained,  in  order  to  avoid  diversity  in 
opinions,  to  set  forth,  with  the  advice  of  his  clergy, 
"  such  a  doctrine  and  declaration  of  the  true  know- 
ledge of  God  and  His  AVord  "  as  would  teach  men 
what  was  necessary  for  every  Christian  to  know. 
And  as  we  only  know  God  perfectly  by  faith,  the 

1  Wilkins,  iii.  868. 

'^  L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  1307  (3) ;  for  the  text  of  which,  and  the  corrections  in 
the  King's  hand,  see  Pocock's  BurneU  iv.  408. 


cH.ii      THE  MAKING  OF   FORMULARIES        355 

article  in  explanation  of  faith  occupied  the  first  place 
in  the  treatise.  Then  followed  the  explanation  of 
the  articles  of  the  Creed,  of  the  Seven  Sacraments, 
of  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  of  the  Ave  Maria. 
Further,  as  people  had  been  much  "  emlmsied  "  about 
the  understanding  of  free  will,  justification,  good 
works,  and  praying  for  souls  departed,  the  plain 
truth  on  these  subjects  also  was  set  forth  without 
ambiguity.  And  he  exhorted  all  his  people  "  both 
to  read  and  print  in  their  hearts  the  doctrine  of  this 
book." 

The  book  is  certainly  a  more  finished  production 
than  its  predecessor,  yet  there  is  no  marked  difference 
of  tone.  Some  of  the  articles  are  substantially  and 
almost  verbally  the  same  in  both  books.  The  exposi- 
tion of  the  Creed  is  more  condensed  than  in  the 
Institution,  the  form  also  being  altered  from  that  of 
a  personal  confession  of  faith  to  a  simple  statement 
of  doctrine  ;  and  "  the  Notes  and  Observations  of  the 
Creed,"  which  were  appended  to  the  exposition  of  it 
in  the  earlier  book  were  got  rid  of  in  the  later. 
Some  readers  may  be  disposed  to  regret  the  omission 
of  special  passages  in  the  Listitution.  Certainly  the 
heart  may  well  be  touched  with  the  warm  language 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  second  article :  "  And  I 
believe  also  and  profess  that  Jesu  Christ  is  not  only 
Jesus,  and  lord  of  all  men  that  believe  in  him,  but 
also  that  he  is  my  Jesus,  my  God  and  my  Lord." 
Yet  the  somewhat  extreme  and  Calvinistic  statement 
of  the  doctrine  of  Original  Sin  to  which  these  words 
are  a  prelude  was  very  well  left  out.  In  the  Sacra- 
ments much  of  the  matter  is  recast,  especially  in 
Baptism,  Penance,  and  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar. 
As  to  the  last,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  Institution 
merely  set  forth  in  one  single  paragraph  the  doctrine 
of  the  Real  Presence  and  the  necessity  of  self-exami- 
nation before  reception — a  teaching  which  would  not 
have   repelled   the   Lutherans ;    but   the   Necessary 


356   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Doctrine  declared  very  explicitly,  and  at  considerable 
length,  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  as  a  truth 
which  was  infallible,  the  sufficiency  of  receiving  in 
one  kind,  and  the  propriety  of  a  fasting  reception, 
while  those  who  attended  should  forbear  to  talk  or 
walk  up  and  down.  A  higher  view  was  taken  on  the 
subject  of  Orders ;  and  on  the  whole  it  is  sufficiently 
clear  that  the  ancient  teaching  of  the  Church  was  on 
most  subjects  more  explicitly  defined  than  it  had  been 
in  the  previous  Formulary.  Just  as  the  Institution 
itself  supplied  the  omissions  of  the  Ten  Articles,  the 
Necessary  Doctrine  supplied  still  more  fully  what 
was  thought  wanting  in  the  Institution.  Men  were 
not  prepared  yet  to  forego  many  things,  even  of  the 
nature  of  doctrine,  which  had  been  rooted  in  the  hearts 
of  humble  souls  by  the  tradition  of  ages.  And  the 
rude  violence  with  which  these  things  had  been 
assailed  was  now,  in  spite  of  despotic  and  other 
influences  which  had  all  along  tended  to  irreverence, 
rebuked  alike  by  episcopal  and  by  royal  authority 
itself. 


CHAPTER  III 

KATHARINE    PARR  AND    THE    NEW   LEARNING 

It  might  be  said,  no  doubt,  and  with  perfect  truth, 
that  the  bishops  and  divines  whose  advice  the  King 
was  obhged  to  take  in  order  to  vindicate  his  own 
position  before  the  world,  had  now  triumphed  over 
a  mass  of  irreverence,  unbelief,  and  blasphemy  which 
the  King  had  been  sedulously  fomenting  in  an  under- 
hand manner  ever  since  he  first  recognised  Rome  as 
his  enemy  in  seeking  a  divorce  from  his  first  wife. 
But  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  enemy  he  had 
stirred  up  was  altogether  vanquished.  Very  far 
from  it.  The  Six  Articles  had  made  some  forms 
of  heresy  and  irreverence  dangerous ;  but  there 
were  many  others  far  more  subtle  than  a  denial 
of  Transubstantiation.  The  Necessai^y  Doctrine  had 
done  what  its  name  implied :  it  had  formulated 
almost  everything  really  necessary  to  the  faith  of 
Christians — in  fact,  everything  absolutely  necessary. 
And  there  is  no  doubt  that  these  successive  defini- 
tions had  done  much  to  free  a  time-honoured  faith 
from  persecution.  But  what  are  formularies  and 
definitions  after  all  ?  They  are  like  treaties  between 
great  powers,  valuable  and  binding  so  long  as 
powerful  interests  find  it  more  advisable  to  keep 
them  than  to  break  them.  Unhappily,  there  is  no 
other  ejuarantee  for  their  maintenance.  For  there 
is  always  ample  margin  for  evasion  and  subtlety ; 
and  there  is  not  always  an  absolute  guarantee  against 
positive  breach  of  faith. 

357 


3  58   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Conflict  But  in    these   matters   relating  to  the  Christian 

throw  f^i"tti  there  was  little  need  of  overt  acts  of  rebellion. 
and  the  The  worlcl  was  already  divided  into  two  schools  of 
Saming.  thought,  the  Old  Learning  and  the  New.  The  Old 
Learning  had  been  gradually  built  up  upon  the 
decisions  of  a  Church  believed  to  be  infallible ;  the 
New  rested  really  upon  private  interpretations  of  a 
book  believed  to  be  infallible  also.  The  authority  of 
the  book,  of  course,  was  not  in  question  ;  it  was 
acknowledged  by  all.  The  only  question  was  about 
its  interpretation — w^hether  such  and  such  transla- 
tions were  good  and  wholesome,  whether  such  and 
such  commentaries  were  not  mischievous,  and  whether 
such  and  such  sectarian  and  novel  views  ought  to  be 
licensed,  with  full  power  to  decry  and  to  rail  at  the 
teachings  of  learned  divines  in  past  ages  confirmed  by 
a  long  course  of  traditional  acceptance.  The  mind  of 
the  sixteenth  century  could  not  endure  such  a  conflict 
of  authorities.  Men  felt  that  there  could  be  but  one 
truth,  and  the  one  truth  only  could  be  wholesome. 
Even  the  Bible-men  tried  to  make  themselves  and 
the  world  believe  that  they  were  in  perfect  harmony 
with  each  other  as  possessed  of  superior  enlighten- 
ment. They,  moreover,  did  study  the  Bible  more 
than  others,  whether  in  wholesome  or  corrupt  trans- 
lations ;  and  if  the  Great  Bible  was  a  corrupt 
translation,  as  Convocation  had  declared  it  to  be, 
the  King  had  taken  very  good  care  that  it  should 
not  be  amended.  The  vested  interests  of  printers, 
stationers,  and  jobbers  were  of  vastly  superior  im- 
portance in  his  eyes  to  the  rectification  of  errors  and 
misapprehensions  connected  with  the  sacred  text. 
To  discredit  and  supersede  a  version  already  before 
the  world  could  only  produce  unsettlement.  So  the 
Bible-lovers  had  their  way,  and  had  an  authorised 
translation  to  appeal  to  —  not  authorised  by  the 
Church,  indeed,  but  solely  by  the  King ;  while  those 
who  were  content  with  old  Church  teaching  went  to 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  359 

mass  as  they  had  always  doue,  without  troubling 
themselves  much  either  with  the  English  Bible  or 
with  the  clear  elocutionists  who  read  it  out  aloud  in 
St.  Paul's  and  other  churches,  to  the  disturbance 
generally  of  the  peaceful,  religious  atmosphere  of  a 
place  that  was  meant  for  devotion. 

Moreover,  the  new  school  had  the  immense  ad- 
vantage of  the  well-known  sympathy  of  the  Primate 
of  all  England  ;  and  when,  like  some  other  cathedrals, 
that  of  Canterbury  underwent  a  constitutional  change, 
the  old  cathedral  convent  of  Christchurch  being  re- 
placed by  a  dean  and  canons,  Cranmer  had  a  special 
opportunity  for  advancing  that  New  Learning  which 
was  dear  to  his  heart.  The  great  change  took  place 
on  the  8th  April  1541,  two  years  before  the  publica- 
tion of  the  book  of  Necessary  Doctrine.  The  Prior 
of  Christchurch  and  twenty-six  of  his  monks  were 
pensioned  oft';  seven  others  were  made  prebendaries 
on  the  new  foundation ;  a  gospeller  and  epistoler 
were  named  in  the  patent,  who  may  perhaps  have 
filled  those  offices  before ;  and  the  remaining  monks 
were  provided  for  as  petty  canons  or  scholars.  Five 
other  prebendaries  were  appointed,  making  the 
number  of  those  dignitaries  twelve,  among  whom 
was  one  Dr.  Nicholas  Ridley,  vicar  of  Heme,  and 
already  master  of  Pembroke  Hall,  Cambridge.  Six 
preachers  were  also  appointed  on  the  staff'  of  the 
Cathedral,  of  whom  one  was  a  Dr.  Lancelot  Ridley, 
Nicholas  Ridley's  cousin-german.  Archbishop  Cran-  cranmerat 
mer  himself  then  visited  Canterbury,  and  on  Trinity  ^^^\^^' 
Sunday,  12th  June,  having  called  before  him  all  the 
prebendaries  and  preachers,  he  told  them  in  the 
course  of  his  address  that  "  the  Bishops'  Book  "  had 
been  put  forth  without  his  consent,  as  the  King  very 
well  knew.^  This  was  clearly  a  hint  that  preaching  of 
a  diff"erent  character  would  not  be  severely  censured 
by  the  Primate,  though  it  is  very  doubtful  whether 

1  L.  p.,  xviii.  ii.  546  (p.  368). 


36o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 


"  the  King's  Book,"  which  he  was  obliged  to  sanction 
two  years  later,  was  really  much  more  to  his  mind. 
In  this  year,  1541,  he  gladly  assisted  the  King  in 
carrying  further  his  war  against  superstition.  For 
in  spite  of  past  orders  to  take  away  the  images  and 
bones  of  saints  to  whose  shrines  the  people  had 
resorted  to  make  offerings,  the  King  intimated  to 
him  by  letters  missive  (probably  drawn  up  by  him- 
self beforehand)  that  he  understood  that  many  shrines 
with  their  coverings  still  remained,  and  therefore 
enjoined  him  at  once  to  search  his  cathedral  to  get 
rid  of  any  that  were  still  found  there,  and  command 
the  clergy  of  his  diocese  to  do  the  like.^ 

Of  the  way  in  which  this  order  was  carried  out 
we  have  an  interesting  glimpse  in  depositions  taken 
two  years  later.  The  parson  of  St.  George's  in 
Canterbury,  whose  name  was  John  Tofer,  at  once 
wrote  from  London  to  his  curate,  John  Paris,  and  his 
churchwardens,  Mr.  Eand  and  Mr.  Bartilmewe,  to 
take  down  the  image  of  St.  George,  as  directed  by 
Mr.  Commissary.  If  it  were  not  done  before  his 
coming  home,  he  said,  he  would  do  it  himself;  and 
he  and  the  churchwardens  actually  did  take  it  down 
accordingly.  But  this  was  not  enough  ;  for  on  Friday 
following  Cranmer's  Commissary  came  and  inquired 
whether  they  had  also  cut  it  in  pieces.  "  No,"  was 
the  reply.  Then  said  the  Commissary,  "It  is  not 
only  the  King's  Majesty's  pleasure  to  have  such 
images  abused  to  be  pulled  down,  but  also  to  be 
disfigured,  and  nothing  of  such  images  to  remain, 
with  the  tabernacle."  Rand  pleaded  that  surely 
it  was  not  the  King's  pleasure  to  pull  down  such 
"  pictures  "  (images  were  often  called  pictures)  when 
there  was  no  common  ofi'ering  at  the  shrine,  especially 
a  "  picture  "  of  the  patron  saint  of  England,  to  whom, 
moreover,  the  church  was  dedicated  ?  "  Why  not  ? " 
said  the  Commissary,  who  undoubtedly  breathed  the 

1  L.  P.,  XVI.  1262  ;  or  CraDmer's  TVorks,  p.  490  (Parker  Soc). 


cH.iii  KATHARINE   PARR  361 

spirit  of  his  master,  Cranmer  :  "  why  not,  as  well  as 
the  crucifix  ?  We  have  no  patron  but  Christ."  A 
churchwarden  could  not  be  expected  to  hear  this  with 
equanimity,  "  If  you  pull  down  the  crucifix,"  said 
Rand,  "  then  pull  down  all."  The  Commissary 
did  not  stick  at  this,  but,  "  for  the  more  surety," 
ordered  it  to  be  done,  and  bade  his  sumner,  John 
Briggs,  see  it  done.  This  was  surely  rude  treatment 
of  old  associations,  especially  at  a  time  when  images  in 
churches  were  held  to  be  in  themselves  legitimate ; 
for  even  "  the  Bishops'  Book,"  in  expounding  the 
Second  Commandment,  had  expressly  admitted  that 
they  were  valuable  to  promote  piety,  instancing 
especially  the  crucifix,  which  Cranmer's  Commissary 
now  insisted  on  getting  rid  of.  Formularies,  appar- 
ently, had  no  binding  force  when  Cranmer  or  his  Craumer 
master  wished  to  go  beyond  them.  Yet  the  King's  H^^^^^^ 
general  order  only  applied  to  images  and  relics  to  express 
which  offerings  were  made,  on  the  ground  that  they  °^'^'^^'^- 
were  the  cause  of  superstition.  And  here  nothing 
worse  could  be  alleged  than  that  once  a  year — on  St. 
George's  Day — the  image  of  the  Saint  was  taken  down 
and  borne  through  the  streets  "  in  the  honor  of  God 
and  the  King,  with  Mr.  Mayor,  the  Aldermen  and 
their  wives,  with  all  the  commons  of  the  same  going 
in  procession."  ^  To  all  appearance,  it  was  more  of  a 
popular  holiday  than  a  superstitious  observance. 

Now,  considering  that  the  old  orthodox  position 
about  images,  as  well  as  about  some  other  things, 
was  again  revindicated  two  years  after  this  in  the 
third  of  our  formularies  (the  Necessary/  Doctrine) 
even  more  strongly  than  it  was  in  "  the  Bishops' 
Book,"  and  that  the  King  himself  then  found  it 
necessary  to  authorise  this  third  Formulary,  we  may 
feel  some  surprise  that  an  archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury should  meanwhile  deliberately  set  himself  to 
contravene  that  teaching  which  had  already  been  laid 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  309. 


362   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

down  by  his  brother  bishops,  and  which  was  after- 
wards to  receive  the  highest  sanction  now  acknow- 
ledged in  the  Church  of  England.  But  so  it  was. 
For  two  years  and  more  before  the  publication  of  the 
Necessary  Doctrine,  Cranmer  had  been  actively  help- 
ing on  the  war  against  images  and  carrying  it  further. 
The  utmost  that  had  been  yet  ordained  by  any 
external  authority  whatever  was,  that  a  particular 
class  of  images  should  be  taken  down  to  avoid  the 
danger  of  idolatry ;  and  the  very  injunctions  by 
which  this  was  decreed — the  injunctions,  that  is  to 
say,  of  Cromwell,  whose  authority,  it  might  have 
been  supposed,  did  not  deserve  increased  respect 
after  his  fall — distinctly  indicated  that  images  in 
themselves  had  their  legitimate  use.  To  make  this 
fully  apparent,  let  us  see  the  precise  words  of 
Cromwell's  injunctions  of  1538  which  l)ear  upon  the 
subject.^  After  enjoining  sermons  against  supersti- 
tion and  things  tending  to  idolatry,  they  go  on  : — 

Item,  that  such  images  -  as  ye  know  in  any  of  your  cures 
to  be  so  abused  with  pilgrimages  or  offerings  of  anything 
made  thereunto,  ye  shall  for  avoiding  of  that  most  detestable 
offence  of  idolatry,  forthwith  take  down  and  deley ;  ^  and 
shall  suffer  from  henceforth  no  candles,  tapers,  or  images  of 
wax  to  be  set  afore  any  image  or  picture,  but  only  the  light 
that  commonly  goeth  across  the  church  by  the  rood  loft,  the 
light  before  the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  and  the  light  about 
the  sepulchre ;  "*  which  for  the  adorning  of  the  church  and 

^  I  print  tliis  paragraph  as  it  stands  in  the  original  Injunctions  issued  by 
Berthelet,  of  which  there  is  a  copy  in  the  British  Museum— not  a  perfect  copy, 
indeed,  but  containing  the  whole  of  this  paragraph.  There  appear  to  be 
some  verbal  differences  in  the  copy  entered  in  the  Archbishop's  register  as 
printed  by  Burnet  and  Wilkins,  and  these,  for  the  sake  of  accuracy,  I  have 
noticed  in  footnotes. 

"  The  copy  in  Cranmer's  register  reads  "  feigned  images." 

^  So  the  word  is  spelt  in  the  printed  original,  and  also  in  a  MS.  copy  signed 
by  Cromwell  in  the  Record  Office.  The  register  apparently  reads  "delaye," 
as  in  Wilkins  (iii.  816),  and  Murray's  great  Dictionary  gives  "deley"  as 
simply  an  obsolete  form  of  "delay,"  but  the  sense  seems  rather  to  suggest 
"  delete  "  or  destroy. 

^  A  "sepulchre"  was  a  niche  in  the  church  wall  in  which  the  sacrament 
was  placed  after  the  mass  of  Maundy  Thursday  till  the  morning  of  Easter 
Day.  Many  "sepulchres"  still  remnin  in  English  churches,  especially  in 
Lincolnshire. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE   PARR  363 

divine  service,  ye  shall  suffer  to  remain  still/  admonishing 
your  parishioners  that  images  serve  for  no  other  purpose  but 
as  to  be  books  of  unlearned  men  that  can  no  letters,  whereb}^ 
they  might  be  otherwise  admonished  of  the  lives  and  conver- 
sation of  them  that  the  said  images  do  represent;  which 
images  if  they  abuse  for  any  other  intent  than  for  such 
remembrances,  they  commit  idolatry  in  the  same,  to  the 
great  danger  of  their  souls.  And  therefore  the  King's 
Highness,  graciously  tendering  the  weal  of  his  subjects' 
Souls,  hath  in  part  already,  and  more  will  hereafter,  travail 
for  the  abolishing  of  such  images  as  might  be  occasion  -  of  so 
great  an  offence  to  God,  and  so  great  danger  ^  to  the  souls  of 
his  loving  suljjects. 

"  In  part  already,  and  more  will  hereafter."  There 
was  no  doubt  an  indication  here  of  things  to  come, 
which  might  be  taken  differently  by  different  people. 
The  party  which  had  set  its  face  against  all  images 
whatever  no  doubt  saw  here  a  vision  of  a  future 
policy  very  much  in  accordance  with  their  wishes. 
But  there  was  no  distinct  implication  that  further 
ordinances  were  to  be  made,  and  the  words  might  be 
read  merely  to  imply  that  further  steps  would  be 
taken  to  enforce  principles  already  laid  down.  That 
the  ambiguity  was  intentional  there  can  hardly  be  a 
question ;  for  it  would  have  been  bad  policy  to  state 
expressly  that  measures  were  in  contemplation  which 
might  create  still  further  disturbance  and  call  for 
remonstrance  from  the  bishops  generally.  But  even 
if  the  ordinance  was  only  to  be  understood  as  tempo- 
rary, it  ought  surely  not  to  have  been  pressed  further 
than  the  language  distinctly  w^arranted ;  and  we  see 
that  the  order  itself  indicates  that  there  was  a  use  of 
images — as  books  for  the  unlearned — which  was  not 
only  unobjectionable  but  wholesome.  And  to  add 
to  all  this,  it  may  l)e  reasonably  presumed  that,  as 

^  There  is  no  punctuation  here  in  tlie  printed  original,  which  leaves  it 
doubtful  whether  a  stop  should  be  made  after  "remain"  or  after  "still." 
But  the  MS.  copy  signed  by  Cromwell  has  the  comma  after  "still." 

^  The  register  reads  "an  occasion." 

^  The  register  reads  "a  danger." 


364  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Cromwell  was  no  particular  theologian,  Cranmer 
himself  had  been  taken  into  consultation  about  the 
language  of  this  injunction.  In  fact,  we  can  read 
here  what  Cranmer's  secret  policy  undoubtedly  was. 
He  would  tolerate  images  at  present  just  so  far  as  he 
must.  They  were,  at  the  ]:)est,  books  for  unlearned 
folk,  which  would  be  needless  if  everybody  could 
read ;  and  though  School  Boards  were  not  even  thought 
of  in  his  day,  sermons  might  bring  home  to  the  igno- 
rant all  such  truths  as  were  of  any  real  value,  about 
saints  or  about  any  other  subject  which  could  be 
considered  edifying.  That  being  so,  what  was  the 
harm  of  going  a  little  further  than  even  ordinances 
and  proclamations  warranted  ?  Cranmer  had  a  con- 
venient instrument  in  his  Commissary,  just  as  the 
King  had  in  Cromwell.  The  name  of  this  official  was 
Christopher  Nevinson,  and  he  was  related  by  marriage 
to  the  Archbishop,  for  his  wife  was  Cranmer's  niece. 
Her  mother,  who  was  Cranmer's  own  sister,  had 
been  a  miller's  wife ;  and,  strange  to  say,  during  her 
husband's  life  she  had  married  another  man  of  the 
name  of  Bingham.  The  fact  was  attested  by  two 
different  witnesses  in  the  course  of  some  voluminous 
depositions  taken  before  Cranmer  himself,  of  which 
an  account  will  be  given  presently,  and  though  he 
cross-questioned  them  and  others  about  many  other 
matters  he  seems  never  to  have  contradicted  this. 
Cranmer's  There  wcrc  also  serious  complaints  of  the  Commissary 
^°"^'  as  a  man  who  actually  favoured  heretics,  connived  at 
favours  irrcgular  practices,  and  had  resigned  a  benefice  under 
heretics.  ^  bond  that  his  successors  should  pay  him  for  many 
years  the  greater  part  of  its  value.  Yet  this  man 
had  been  elected  by  Cranmer's  influence  as  one  of  the 
proctors  in  Convocation  of  Canterbury  Cathedral.^ 

What  wonder,  then,  that  in  spite  of  episcopal 
formularies  "  the  New  Learning,"  and  the  new 
irreverence  shown  to  old  usages,  made  steady  pro- 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  291,  329,  330,  359. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE   PARR  365 

gress,  at  least  in  the  diocese  of  Canterbury  ?  When 
Bishop  Gardiner  returned  home  from  Germany  in 
the  autumn  of  1541,  he  naturally  heard  mass 
in  Canterbury  Cathedral.  Among  the  prebendaries 
on  the  new  foundation,  which  had  not  been  quite 
half  a  year  in  existence,  he  found  a  namesake  of 
his  own,  William  Gardiner,  also  known  by  another 
surname.  Sandwich.  After  mass  he  inquired  of  this 
namesake  as  to  the  condition  of  religious  matters 
among  them,  and  was  told,  as  he  indeed  had  heard 
already,  that  the  preachers  did  not  agree  with  each 
other.  In  reply  to  further  questions,  William  Gardiner 
told  him  about  the  preaching  of  Dr.  Lancelot  Ridley 
and  of  Master  Scory,  another  of  Cranmer's  six 
preachers,  afterwards  an  Edwardine  and  Elizabethan 
bishop.  The  Bishop  listened  quietly  till  the  pre- 
bendary spoke  of  an  objection,  raised  by  one  or 
other  of  these,  to  prayer  in  an  unknown  tongue, 
which  he  had  said  was  only  babbling.  "  There  he 
missed,"  said  the  Bishop,  "  for  the  Germans  them- 
selves are  now  against  that  saying."  Bishop  Gardiner 
added  that  my  Lord  of  Canterbury  must  correct  such 
preaching,  and  he  believed  he  would.  But  it  was 
not  mere  erroneous  preaching  that  disturbed  Canon 
Gardiner.  His  own  preaching  was  marked  by  others, 
and  he  feared  they  were  anxious  to  catch  him  trip- 
ping. He  asked  the  Bishop's  advice  what  to  do. 
The  Bishop  advised  him  to  write  his  sermon  before- 
hand in  a  book,  every  word  as  he  would  preach  it, 
and  ask  the  best  man  that  could  read  among  the 
audience  to  take  the  book  and  read  it  as  he  preached. 
If  he  took  care  not  to  say  more  than  he  had  written, 
that  would  be  his  safeguard ;  and  as  to  others,  if 
they  preached  amiss,  he  had  better  say  nothing.^ 

It  had  come  to  this,  then,  that  in  the  chief  Orthodox 
metropolitan  diocese  of  England,  and  especially  in  h^tlmi-*^'^ 
and   about   Canterbury  itself,   it   was   dangerous   to  'latedat 

1  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  339.  bury. 


366  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

say  too  much,  even  in  favour  of  things  hitherto 
approved,  although  no  acknowledged  authority  had 
yet  openly  denounced  them.  So  strange  a  revolu- 
tion deserves  careful  study ;  and  the  materials  for 
studying  it  have  recently  been  made  available.  The 
reader,  of  course,  has  often  heard  of  certain  alleged 
"  conspiracies "  against  Cranmer  on  account  of  the 
doctrine  taught  by  him  and  his  chaplains  in  Kent ;  ^ 
the  chief  of  which  "  conspiracies "  was  a  complaint 
made  against  him  by  the  prebendaries  of  his  own 
cathedral,  backed  by  some  of  the  local  gentry  and 
country  justices.  This  complaint,  we  can  tell,  was 
laid  before  the  King  in  1543,  the  year  of  the  pub- 
lication of  the  book  of  Necessary  Doctrine.  That 
no  such  complaint  had  been  laid  before  the  King 
earlier  was  due  merely  to  the  manifest  favour  in 
which  Archbishop  Cranmer  was  regarded  by  the 
Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England.  In  fact, 
efforts  had  been  made  to  complain  before,  but  the 
petitions  had  been  quashed  and  refused  considera- 
tion. Henry,  however,  must  have  been  ruminating 
in  private  over  Granvelle's  communications,  and  the 
possibility  that  one  day,  even  to  have  some  friend 
or  other  upon  the  Continent,  he  might,  perhaps,  be 
driven  to  reconciliation  with  Rome.  These  thoughts, 
at  least,  may  have  had  their  influence  in  his  allowing 
Convocation  to  settle  the  terms  of  his  third  formulary 
of  faith  in  a  sense  more  congenial  than  before  to 
ancient  doctrine,  as  there  was  now  no  use  in  holding 
a  door  open  to  conciliate  the  Lutherans.  At  all 
events,  it  is  sufficiently  clear  that  in  1543  the 
adherents  of  the  ancient  faith  were  beginning  to 
entertain  hopes  that  their  protests  against  new- 
fangled doctrines  would  meet  with  a  more  hearty 
response  from  the  King  himself. 

How  the  professors  of  such   teaching  had    been 
encouraged  in  previous  years  appears  distinctly  from 

^  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  p.  251. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE   PARR  367 

documents  of  unquestionable  authority.  On  that 
same  Trinity  Sunday  above  referred  to,  in  1541, 
Cranmer  intimated  to  his  clergy  at  Canterbury  "  that 
he  had  set  in  Christcliurch  six  preachers,  three 
of  the  Old  Learning  and  three  of  the  New."  "  My 
Lord,"  said  Canon  Gardiner,  "  that  is  a  mean  to 
set  us  at  variance ! "  But  the  Archbishop  at  once 
silenced  him  with  the  reply,  "  The  King's  pleasure 
is  to  have  it  so."  In  August  following  "  about  the 
Assumption  of  Our  Lady  (the  15th)  the  Archbishop 
spoke  about  the  matter  again  in  the  consistory,  when, 
as  Cox,  one  of  the  petty  canons,  reported,  he  said 
that  the  six  preachers  had  been  appointed,  three 
of  Oxford  and  three  of  Cambridge,  "  to  the  intent 
that  they  might  between  them  try  out  the  truth 
of  doctrine."  Cox,  when  interrogated  upon  the  sub- 
ject two  years  afterwards,  could  not  be  sure  whether 
the  Archbishop's  words  implied  that  the  King  had 
made  the  appointments,  or  the  Archbishop  himself; 
but  the  Archbishop  clearly  was  anxious  to  shelter 
himself  under  the  King's  authority.  It  certainly 
would  appear  both  by  Canon  Gardiner's  statement 
and  by  that  of  several  other  canons,  that  Cranmer 
did  at  first  convey  the  impression  that  he  had 
made  the  appointments  himself  and  then  shown 
the  King  what  he  had  done,  when  the  King  ex- 
pressed his  approbation.  Canon  Gardiner,  too,  on 
being  further  questioned,  stood  by  this  statement, 
saying,  "  of  his  conscience,"  that  the  Archl)ishop 
had  used  such  words  ;  but  ultimately  he  was  brought 
to  acknowledge — without  revoking  what  he  had  said 
otherwise — that  the  Archbishop  had  announced,  even 
at  the  first,  that  it  was  the  King's  pleasure  to  have 
three  of  the  Old  Learning  and  three  of  the  New.^ 

One  might  have  supposed  that  the  point  mattered 
little.     Cranmer  had  the  King's  authority  for  what 

1  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  pp.  323,  333  (Interr.  5,  answered  aftirmatively  by  Mills, 
p.  366),  345  (same  interr.),  348,  353,  361,  363,  364,  376. 


368   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

lie  did,  whether  given  before  or  after ;  and  he  cer- 
tainly would  not  have  ventured  beforehand  on  an 
innovation  which  the  King  was  at  all  likely  to 
disapprove.  But  it  was  none  the  less  an  awkward 
innovation,  tending  distinctly,  as  Canon  Gardiner 
had  said,  to  foster  religious  differences  and  disputes. 
Moreover,  if  the  preaching  of  opposite  schools  was 
to  be  addressed  to  popular  audiences,  it  was  a 
novelty  that  was  hard  to  justify.  But  Cranmer  was 
anxious  to  explain  it  otherwise.  A  diversity  of 
preachers  had  been  appointed,  one  of  his  friends 
declared,  "  to  the  intent  that  they  might  between 
them  try  out  the  truth  of  doctrine  "  ;  or,  as  another 
put  it,  "  that  matters  then  in  controversy  might  be 
reasoned  among  themselves,  and  not  preached  among 
the  people  to  engender  strife."  ^  The  apology,  how- 
ever, was  but  a  lame  one.  To  try  out  the  truth 
of  doctrine  by  disputation  was  a  mere  scholastic 
function,  and  scholars  at  the  universities  might 
raise  questions  with  the  greatest  freedom.  They 
might  even  discuss,  as  they  had  done  in  past  times, 
whether  God  existed  or  not.  But  this  was  not  the 
function  of  preaching ;  and  discussion,  if  it  did  not 
edify  the  people  on  matters  on  which  the  mind  of 
the  whole  Church  had  sufficiently  declared  itself, 
could  hardly  edify  scholars  either,  if  the  pulpit  was 
to  be  the  vehicle  of  disputation. 

There  is  no  doubt,  unfortunately,  that  these 
appointments  did  actually  tend  to  engender  strife, 
as  Canon  Gardiner  had  foretold.  Conspicuous 
among  the  new  preachers  were  Dr.  Lancelot  Ridley 
and  Dr.  John  Scory.  In  1541  they  were  both  accused 
of  evil  preaching  during  Rogation  week  ^  (before  the 
middle  of  April) ;  and  on  Ascension  Day,  Scory  had 
given  further  offence  in  a  sermon  delivered  at  St. 
Alphege's  church  in   Canterbury.^      In   this  sermon 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  323,  364.  "  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  p.  363. 

■^  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  pp.  304,  317,  347,  352. 


CH.  iH  KATHARINE  PARR  369 

lie  had  said,  "  There  is  none  in  Heaven  but  Christ 
only  "  ;  and  also,  "  Ye  have  a  saying,  the  child  which 
is  born  between  man  and  wife,  it  is  born  in  original 
sin ;  and  so  it  is.  And  ye  say  that  the  sin  is  taken 
away  by  the  water  of  baptism,  but  it  is  not  so.  But 
look  how  the  wife  that  occupieth  the  fire  all  the  day 
and  at  night  covereth  it  with  ashes  to  preserve  the 
fire;  so  doth  the  sin  remain  under  the  Sacrament."  ^ 
Four  witnesses  vouched  for  the  charges  ao^ainst  both 
him  and  Ridley  ;  but  they  were  never  called  to  recant, 
and  nothing  was  done  to  them.'  No  doubt,  if  freedom 
of  the  pulpit  be  a  very  desirable  principle,  this  was 
just  as  it  should  be ;  but  such  freedom,  in  that  case, 
should  have  been  given  impartially.  In  this  same 
year  Robert  Series,  vicar  of  Lenham,  another  of  the 
six  preachers  of  Canterbury,  but  of  the  Old  Learning, 
was  sued  in  the  Archbishop's  consistory  court  for  his 
preaching,  and  had  to  give  a  bond  that  he  would 
appear  before  Cranmer  on  the  10th  October,  and 
abide  his  judgment.  He  did  so,  and  was  then 
committed  to  prison.  Another  of  these  Cathedral 
preachers,  Edmund  Shether,  was  also  imprisoned  for 
his  preaching,  apparently  about  the  same  time ;  and 
we  do  not  know  precisely  for  what  they  were  censured. 
Canon  Gardiner  was  of  opinion  that  the  preaching  of 
both  was  perfectly  innocent ;  and  indeed  it  was  popu- 
lar, both  in  the  city  and  in  the  country  round  about. ^ 
But  Cranmer  was  reported  to  have  said  in  private 
that  he  could  defend  the  positions  taken  up  by  Ridley 
and  Scory  if  they  had  an  indifferent  judge ;  only  he  craumer's 
would  have  that  judge  out  of  Germany.*     He  was  J^anJJJIJ 

^  L,  P.,  xviii.  ii.  pp.  314-15.  In  this  deposition  "Ascension  clay  was 
twelvemonth  "  seems  clearly  to  be  a  mistake,  the  Aseensiun  day  referred  to 
being  no  dotibt  the  same  as  in  the  other  dej)osition,  that  is,  two  years  befoie 
these  depositions  were  taken.  In  each  case  the  sermon  is  preached  in  St. 
Alphege's  church,  and  Cranmer  said  he  would  uphold  the  doctrines  of  which 
both  Ridley  and  Scory  were  accused  in  the  first  presentment  against  them  ; 
that  is  in  1541  (see  p.  304).  ^  ji^^  pp_  304,  -joi^  337^  350^  354^  3g5_ 

■*  Nicolas's  Privy  Council  Proceedings,  vii.  244  ;  L.  P. ,  xviii.  ii.  pp.  346,  348. 

*  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  298,  334,  341,  356-7  (22nd  interrogatory  in  p.  356, 
and  answer  to  it  p.  357). 

VOL.   II  2  B 


370  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

eveD  now  maintaming  a  constant  correspondence  with 
the  German  reformers ;  ^  and  he  evidently  regarded 
Germany  as  the  land  of  judicial  impartiality  in 
matters  theological.  But  his  own  impartiality  be- 
tween the  two  opposite  schools  in  his  own  cathedral 
city  is  not  manifest.  Canon  Gardiner  had  good 
reason  to  sympathise  w^ith  Shether ;  for  he  and 
Shether  were  both  out  of  favour,  and  both,  as  they 
felt,  for  simply  doing  their  duty.  In  obedience  to 
a  letter  to  them  from  the  Archbishop  himself,  they 
had  felt  bound  to  inform  against  one  Humphrey 
Chirden  or  Cherdian,  parson  of  St.  Alphege's,  Canter- 
bury, who  was  accordingly  examined  before  Cranmer 
at  Lambeth.  His  preaching  had  been  pointed  enough 
— against  the  Confessional,  for  one  thing.  For  on 
the  first  Sunday  in  Lent  he  had  told  his  congregation  : 
"  If  Judas  had  gone  to  God  and  confessed  his  fault, 
saying  Peccavi,  as  he  went  unto  the  priests,  he  had 
not  been  damned."  ^  Chirden,  however,  had  good 
friends  in  Mr.  Batter ste  of  Canterbury,  and  Mr. 
Salter,  "  one  of  the  King's  beadsmen,"  who  got 
men  to  sign  a  bill  drawn  up  by  them  for  his  ex- 
culpation ;  and  Batterste  was  known  to  have  said  in 
private  "  that  Mr.  Gardiner  and  Mr.  Shether  should 
quail  for  the  troubling  of  the  said  Sir  Humphrey."  ^ 

Another  thing  is  recorded  of  that  conference  on 
Trinity  Sunday,  1541,  between  Cranmer  and  his 
Cathedral  staff.  Series  had  certainly  upheld  strongly 
in  his  sermons  the  use  of  imas^es.  Whether  he  had 
transgressed  limits  imposed  in  the  Institution  or 
Injunctions  does  not  appear ;  but  he  had  said  there 
could  be  no  idolatry  in  the  case  of  an  image  of 
Our  Lady,  for  all  images  were  but  representatives 
of  saints  and  were  not  idols.  The  Archbishop  told 
him,  on  the  contrary,  that  all  images  were  idols. 
Series  objected   to   this,  and  the  Archbishop  asked 

^  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  329.  '^  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  p.  299. 

'  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  309,  310,  342,  346,  351-2,  357,  359,  365. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  371 

him,  "  What  is  idolum  ?  "     He  replied  readily  from 
Scripture,  Idolum  nihil  est.     Cranmer  told  him  that  Cranmer 
idolum  and  imago  meant  the  very  same  thing.     On  arSlje 
this  Canon  Gardiner  broke  in  with  a  protest  of  his  the  same 
own ;  he  could  not  think  that  an  image  and  an  idol  kJoi.^  ^^  *" 
were  quite  the  same  thing,   but  that  an   image  to 
which   undue  honour  was  paid  was  an  idol.     "  You 
know  not  the  Greek,"  said  Cranmer  authoritatively ; 
^^  idolum  and  imago  are  all  one."     Canon  Gardiner 
could  not  take  this  quite  submissively.     "  My  Lord," 
he  said,  "  although  I  know  not  the  Greek,  yet  I  trust 
I  know  the  truth,  and  that  by  St.  Paul,"  referring 
to  Romans  i.  ;   and  his  argument,  surely,  was  none 
the  worse  because  the  Vulgate  here  does   not  use 
the  word  idolum,  but  in  verse  23  has  the  expression 
similitudinem  imaginis.  ^ 

If  all  images  were  idols,  which  was  just  what  the 
old  Lollard  party  considered  them,  all  images,  of 
course,  were  objectionable,  whether  "abused"  with 
offerings  and  pilgrimages  or  not.  But  as  yet  images 
were  supposed  to  be  tolerated ;  and  it  really  seems 
that  in  this,  as  in  other  things,  the  adherents  of  the 
Old  Learning  scarcely  met  with  fair  play. 

Meanwhile,  Scory  and  Dr.  Lancelot  Ridley  were  in 
no  fear.  On  the  fourth  Sunday  in  Lent,  "  1541  " 
(which  in  our  computation  means  1542,  the  day  being 
19th  March),  Scory  preached  the  doctrine  that  faith 
alone  justifies,  which  Cranmer,  doubtless,  would  have 
upheld  also,  especially  by  the  aid  of  "  a  judge  out  of 
Germany  "  ;  and  he  afterwards  maintained  from  the 
pulpit  "that  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  which  is  sacri- 
ficium,  et  hostia  is  not  hostia  pro  peccatis  but  hostia 
laudis}   Dr.  Lancelot  Ridley,  about  the  same  time  (on 

1  L.  P.,  XYiii.  ii.  pp.  321,  348,  3f)2,  355,  361,  366-8.  Shether  evidently 
made  a  slip  in  his  deposition  on  this  subject  at  p.  352,  where  he  dates  the 
occurrence  "on  Trinity  Sunday  was  twelvemonths,"  which  would  be  1542. 
The  date  is  absolutely  fixed  in  Hunt's  deposition,  p.  368,  and  identified  with 
the  time  when  Cranmer  said  that  "the  Bishops'  Book"  had  been  published 
without  his  consent. 

-  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  304-305,  317,  363,  366,  367. 


372   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Passion  Monday),  preached  at  Ash  "  that  prayer  for 
Freedom  of  souls  departed  availed  nothing."^  This  gave  great 
^reacSIrs  ^ffence,  as  it  was  not  only  opposed  to  all  hitherto 
received  teaching,  but  was  in  express  contradiction 
even  to  "  the  Bishops'  Book,"  the  last  issued  formu- 
lary ;  while  that  third  formulary  still  to  come,  the 
Necessai^y  Doctrine,  commended  not  only  prayers 
but  masses  for  the  deceased,  "  trusting  that  these 
things  do  not  only  profit  and  avail  them  but  also 
declare  us  to  be  charitable  folk."  But  some  of 
Scory's  further  utterances  even  Cranmer  could  not 
defend.  At  Christmas,  when  there  was  a  general 
procession  ordered  by  the  King,  he  preached  in 
Canterbury  Cathedral,  and  said,  "  Every  country  hath 
a  custom  to  choose  a  patron,  as  England  hath  chosen 
St.  George,  Scotland  St.  Andrew,  thinking  rather  by 
intercession  of  Saints  to  obtain  the  victory  of  their 
enemies.  But,  good  people,  forasmuch  as  Saints  be 
circumscript,  it  is  not  possible  for  that  Saint  that  is 
in  the  North  to  hear  the  prayer  that  is  made  in  the 
South,  nor  that  Saint  that  is  in  the  South  to  hear  the 
prayer  that  is  made  in  the  North."  ■''  If  preaching  like 
this  was  intended  as  an  antidote  to  superstition,  it 
certainly  seems  an  odd  one.  No  wonder,  then,  that 
when  complaints  against  new-fangled  doctrines  were 
raised  a  little  more  loudly  in  1543,  even  Scory  found 
himself  for  a  time  in  prison.  The  matter  which 
caused  his  arrest  seems  to  have  been  a  sermon 
delivered  shortly  after  Easter  in  that  year.^ 

It  is  clear  that  up  to  this  time  Cranmer  and  his 
Commissary  had  protected  some  heretics,  even  of  a 
rather  extreme  type,  against  the  rigour  of  the  law ; 
for  such  was   certainly  Joan   Baron  of   Canterbury, 
joau  otherwise  named  Joan  Bocher,  apparently  a  butcher's 

Bociier.  wife,  wlio  was  at  last  burned  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
VI.  She  was  already  notorious,  and  her  immunity 
was  denounced  as  positively  scandalous  by  men  like 

1  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  349.  2  ^rj.,  pp.  305,  308.  *  lb.,  p,  329. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE   PARR  373 

Prebendary  Milles,  another  dignitary  on  the  new 
establishment  of  Canterbury  Cathedral.  Indeed,  it  is 
rather  extraordinary,  considering  the  extreme  severity 
of  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles,  and  what  we  are  com- 
monly told  of  the  relentless  manner  in  which  it  was 
pressed,  to  find  unquestionable  evidence  that  a  woman 
who  had  "  denied  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  with 
many  slanderous  words,"  and  whose  written  confes- 
sion of  the  fact  was  in  the  hands  of  Cranmer's  officers, 
was  protected  by  Cranmer's  Commissary  from  the 
punishment  due^by  the  law.  She  began,  apparently, 
to  disturb  the  world  at  Colchester,  which  was  in 
Bishop  Bonner's  diocese,  but  there  she  was  abjured. 
This  was,  however,  before  Bonner  was  bishop,  and 
before  the  Act  was  passed  in  1539  ;  for  abjuration 
was  no  protection  from  the  death  penalty  under  the 
Act  when  the  leading  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  was 
denied.  Moreover,  she  had  the  benefit  of  the  King's 
pardon  issued  under  a  proclamation  of  26th  February 
1539,  four  months  before  the  Act  was  passed,  in 
favour  of  those  who  had  been  seduced  by  Anabaptists 
and  Sacramentaries,  and  were  willing  to  return  to  the 
Church.^  This  document  she  carefully  preserved  for 
her  security ;  yet  occasionally  she  seems  to  have 
defended  her  old  opinions  in  a  way  that  provoked 
comment. 

Meanwhile  she  had  removed,  or  been  removed,  to 
Canterbury — the  story  at  this  point  is  not  clear.  In 
1542  she  had  gone  over  from  Canterbury  to  Calais, 
where  she  was  again  accused  of  heresy,  but  acquitted 
by  a  jury.  The  Council  of  Calais,  however,  remanded 
her  to  prison  as  there  was  another  information  against 
her  at  Canterbury,  and  she  was  sent  back  to  Eng- 
land." In  about  two  years,  which  probably  included 
the  time  she  was  at  Calais,  she  was  imprisoned 
in  England  also,  without  any  evidence  being 
brought  against  her,  it  was  alleged — that  is  to  say, 

'  L.  p.,  XIV.  i.  374.  ■  L.P.,  XVII,  829. 


374  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  mc.  iv 

apparently,  without  aoy  judicial  process ;  for  there 
was  sufficient  evidence  of  her  heresy  in  a  written  con- 
fession of  her  own.  She  had  been  brought  at  first 
before  some  temporal  judge,  who  delivered  her  into 
the  hands  of  the  Archbishop's  officers.  Cranmer's 
Commissary  then  proposed  to  set  her  free  under  the 
proclamation,  but  Prebendary  Milles  objected,  saying 
that  her  own  confession  condemned  her — a  statement 
in  which,  apparently,  he  was  supported  by  several 
others.  "  Be  you  all  able  to  prove  that  you  have 
spoken  ?  "  said  the  Commissary  ;  and  he  called  upon 
them  to  justify  it.  "  Sir,"  said  the  Prebendary,  "  her 
confession  is  in  your  registry."  The  Commissary 
said  he  had  not  been  able  to  find  it,  but  would 
inquire  further.  This,  however,  was  a  mere  excuse ; 
and  he  caused  a  number  of  witnesses  to  come  on  the 
week  of  Palm  Sunday.  Prebendary  Milles  said  he 
had  taken  much  unnecessary  trouble,  and  undertook 
himself  to  find  her  confession  in  the  registry  if  the 
Commissary  would  despatch  his  servant  thither  along 
with  him.  The  result  was  that  the  confession  was 
found.  So  the  next  court  day  the  Commissary 
declared  her  to  be  a  heretic  both  by  her  own  con- 
fession and  by  witnesses,  and  told  her  she  could 
not  deny  it.  "  But,"  he  said,  "  you  have  a  thing 
to  stick  to,  which  may  do  you  good.  I  advise  you 
to  stick  to  it."  On  this  she  brought  out  the 
King's  pardon  for  penitent  Anabaptists  and  Sacra- 
mentaries.^ 

This  was  probably  in  the  spring  of  1543.  Heresy 
had  been  running  riot  till  then  in  spite  of  the  Six 
Articles,  for  "  the  whip  with  six  strings,"  as  the 
heretics  called  it,  was  not  very  frequently  laid  on  ; 
and,  if  report  spoke  truly,  Cranmer  himself  once, 
Cranmer  "  bootcd  aud  spurrcd,  read  a  lecture  on  the  Sacra- 
£eSa-  iiient  of  the  Altar,  saying  it  was  l)ut  a  similitude." 
ment  only  We  cau  Well  imaofine  that  such  a  declaration  "  troubled 


a  simili- 


"&' 


tude.  ^  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  291,  313,  314,  331,  353-4,  359,  366. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE   PARR  375 

the  hearers'  hearts  much,"  ^  and  we  almost  wonder 
whether  they  had  heard  him  truly,  seeing  that  the 
legal  penalty  for  such  an  utterance  was,  at  that  time, 
uothino;  less  than  death.  But  such  we  know  w^ere 
Cranmer's  avowed  opinions  at  a  later  date,  when  the 
Act  was  repealed,  and  the  incident  was  put  on  record 
four  years  before  its  repeal.  What  are  we  to  think  ? 
It  seems  as  if  the  Primate  might  take  liberties  with 
the  law  which  another  man  would  not  dare  to  venture 
upon. 

But  early  in  1543  matters  were  taking  a  new  Reaction 
turn.  Even  before  Convocation  had  addressed  orthodoxy 
itself  to  the  task  of  revising  the  Institutioii  and  in  ^  543. 
turning  it  into  the  third  formulary  of  Necessary 
Doctrine,  the  King  appears  to  have  been  convinced 
that  it  was  desirable  to  do  something  to  check  the 
spread  of  heresy ;  and  the  chief  agent  whom  he 
employed  was,  as  might  have  been  expected,  not  a 
man  of  over-refined  feeling  or  over-scrupulous  con- 
science. Dr.  London  was  the  man.  He  had  been 
made  a  prebendary  of  Windsor  in  the  autumn  of 
1540,  when  he  was  appalled  at  the  hold  heresy  had 
got  in  St.  George's  Chapel.  But  apparently  it  was 
no  use  stirring  in  the  matter  till  the  spring  of  1543, 
when  he  succeeded  in  calling  the  King's  attention  to 
the  subject,  who  expressed  great  astonishment  and 
indignation.  So  it  appeared  that  a  heresy  hunt  was 
now  beginning,  and  no  one  was  to  be  afraid  to  accuse 
even  the  most  exalted  persons. 

In  the  Advent  season  of  the  preceding  year  Robert 
Series  had  preached  at  Chilham  in  Kent,  where  the 
vicar.  Dr.  Willoughby,  was  a  King's  chaplain  ;  and 
he  took  the  opportunity,  when  there,  of  urging 
Willoughby  to  "  put  up  articles  to  the  King,"  seeing 
that  his  relations  with  royalty  imposed  on  him  a 
special  duty  to  inform  against  heresy.  Series  said 
that  he  himself  had  previously  endeavoured  to  put  up 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  331. 


376   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

articles,  "  but  they  were  so  cloaked  that  the  King 
never  saw  them,  and  on  his  return  he  was  laid  in 
prison."  This,  as  we  have  seen,  had  occurred  just  a 
year  before,  late  in  1541 ;  and  Series  evidently  con- 
sidered that  orthodoxy  was  treated  as  heresy,  while 
heresy  received  special  protection.  Dr.  Willoughby 
said  he  was  quite  willing  to  "  put  up  articles,"  pro- 
vided they  were  such  as  could  be  proved ;  and.  Series 
having  preached  at  his  church  again  on  Passion 
Sunday  (11th  March  1543),  they  both  rode  up  to 
London  together  on  the  Friday  following.  Dr. 
Willoughby  had  an  object  of  his  own  which  required 
him  to  see  the  City  Chamberlain,  and  on  the  Saturday 
Series,  apart  from  Dr.  Willoughby,  presented  some 
articles  to  Dr.  London.  Next  day,  Palm  Sunday, 
Series  brought  Dr.  Willoughby  to  Dr.  London,  saying 
that  he  would  present  the  articles.  But  Dr. 
Willoughby  asked  to  hear  them  first,  as  he  had  never 
yet  seen  them,  and  then  declined  to  present  them,  as 
they  rested  only  on  hearsay.  This  led  to  a  scene. 
Dr.  London  had  already  reported  the  articles  to  some 
of  the  Council,  and  he  told  Series  he  would  declare 
who  brought  them  ;  then,  turning  to  Willoughby,  told 
him  that  it  was  his  duty  to  reveal  such  shameful 
articles  now  that  he  had  seen  them.  "  Fear  not,"  he 
added,  "for  I  have  set  such  a  spectacle  before  you  at 
Windsor  in  bringing  to  light  abominable  heresies, 
at  the  which  the  King's  Majesty  was  astonied  and 
wonder  angry,  both  with  the  doers  and  bearers."  On 
this  Dr.  Willoughby  gave  his  assent,  and  Dr.  London 
wrote  the  articles  anew,  but  with  additions  of  his  own, 
"  to  bring  the  matter  into  the  justices'  hands  and 
certain  of  the  spiritualty."  This  was  not  fair  either 
to  Dr.  Willoughby  or  to  Series,  and  they  were  both 
vexed.  ^ 
Mnch  At  this  time  the  King's  Council  were  busy  with 

huSg.  ii^atters  of  heresy   to  the   exclusion  of  every   other 

1  L.  p.,  xvni.  ii.  pp.  324-6. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  377 

subject.  They  were  sitting  at  Westminster  from  day 
to  day,  and  the  following  is  the  exact  record  of  their 
business  : — 

March  15th. — "  Letters  were  sent  for  Dr.  Haynes  " 
(this  was  the  Dean  of  Exeter)  "  to  repair  unto  the 
court  and  to  present  himself  before  the  Council  the 
morrow  after  at  2  of  the  clock  at  afternoon." 

March  16th. — "Dr.  Haynes  appearing  before  the 
Council,  after  certain  things  objected  against  him 
touching  his  own  evil  opinions,  and  the  maintaining 
also  of  sundry  persons  in  the  like,  was  committed  to 
the  Fleet." 

March  17th.  —  "Thomas  Weldon,  one  of  the 
masters  of  the  Household,  sent  for  to  appear  before 
the  Council,  being  found  culpable  in  the  maintaining 
of  one  Sir  Thomas  Parson,  clerk,  who  was  known  to 
be  a  man  of  evil  opinions  touching  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Altar,  was  committed  to  the  Fleet." 

March    ISth   (this    was    Palm    Sunday). — " 

Sternall,  for  like  causes  objected  and  proved  against 
him,  was  committed  likewise  unto  the  Fleet. 

"  The  same  day  Philip  Hobby,  one  of  the  gentle- 
men ushers  of  the  King's  Privy  Chamber,  for  the  main- 
taining of  the  above  named  Sir  Thomas  Parson,  etc., 
was  also  committed  unto  the  Fleet. 

"  Letters  were  sent  to  Windsor  to  call  up  Test- 
wood,  Morbecke  and  Benett,  inhabitants  of  the  same, 
to  appear  before  the  Council." 

The  above  is  the  whole  record  of  the  acts  of  the 
Privy  Council  for  four  successive  days.  What 
follows  is  only  two  items  extracted  from  the  busi- 
ness of  the  day  following  : — 

March  19th. — " Morbacke,  inhabitant  of  the 

town  of  Windsor,  for  certain  seditious  opinions  and 
other  his  misbehaviours  in  defence  and  maintenance 
of  the  same,  was  committed  to  the  Marshalsea. 

"  A  letter  was  sent,  signed  by  the  stamp,  to  the 
Bishop    and    Chapter    of    Exeter    to    certify    what 


378   LOLLARDYAND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

they    knew    touching     the    evil    opinions    of     Dr. 
Haynes." ' 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  so  important  a  dignitary 
as  the  Dean  of  Exeter  had  by  this  time  got  into 
trouble  for  heresy,  and  also  some  persons  about  the 
Court,  and  some  persons  of  Windsor.  We  can  see 
something  of  Dr.  London's  doings  here,  who  had 
"  set  such  a  spectacle  at  Windsor,"  as  he  said  himself. 
But  the  reader  may  be  interested  to  know  a  little 
more  about  these  Windsor  men  than  the  mere  names. 
"  Morbacke,"  as  his  name  is  spelt  on  the  record,  was 
The  no  other  than  the  famous  musician,  John  Marbeck, 
hll-eUcr  ^^^^  ^^^  organist  of  St.  George's  Chapel.  Testwood 
was  a  singer  in  the  choir  there.  Robert  Benett,  a 
lawyer,  was  not  a  man  of  importance.  "  Sternall," 
who  is  not  named  as  a  Windsor  man,  and  probably 
had  no  particular  connection  with  Windsor,  was  a 
gentleman  of  the  King's  Chamber,  known  to  posterity 
as  Thomas  Sternhold,  the  author  of  a  metrical  version 
of  the  Psalms.  Lollard  piety  had  evidently  taken  a 
poetical  and  a  musical  turn  with  some  people,  just  as 
the  kindred  spirit  of  Calvinism  had  awakened  the 
muse  of  Clement  Marot  in  France. 

Dr.  Willoughby  and  Dr.  Series  were  both  uncom- 
fortable. Dr.  London  insisted  on  dragging  Willoughby 
before  the  Council  to  declare  everything  upon  his 
allegiance ;  and  Willoughby,  if  he  had  been  compelled 
to  go  before  them,  would  have  been  obliged  to  say 
that  he  could  not  vouch  for  the  articles  except  by 
hearsay.  But  after  being  kept  three  days  in  suspense 
he  told  Dr.  London  he  would  go  home  on  the  Wednes- 
day afternoon.  He  remained,  however,  till  Thursday 
morning,  when  he  endeavoured  to  see  Bishop  Gardiner 
in  his  house  at  St.  Mary  Overy's.  Unluckily  in  the 
parlour  he  found  Dr.  London,  who  was  angry  that  he 
was  not  gone,  and  bade  him  go  at  once  and  tell  the 
prebendaries  that  they  should    have   a  commission 

^  Dasent's  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  i.  96-98. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  379 

within  a  week.  He  might  also  tell  the  Justices  of 
the  Peace  that  the  Council  were  not  at  all  well 
pleased  at  their  negligence  in  allowing  such  heresies 
to  be  preached  in  the  country  unchecked.  Dr. 
Willoughby  got  home  on  Good  Friday,  ill  at  ease 
about  the  articles  to  which  he  was  committed.  On 
Easter  Eve  he  came  to  Canterbury,  where,  after 
dinner.  Canon  Gardiner  called  him  into  his  garden 
and  showed  him  articles  drawn  up  against  the  Arch- 
bishop himself,  asking  him  if  they  might  trust  him 
to  let  Dr.  London  see  them  privately,  and  deliver 
them  to  the  Bishop  of  Winchester.  This  he  agreed 
to  do,  and  he  made  a  second  journey  up  to  London 
in  Easter  week.  Dr.  London  "  made  much  joy " 
when  he  saw  the  articles.  A  deputation  from  Canter- 
bury came  at  the  same  time  to  complain  of  Humphrey 
Chirden,  and  received  much  encouragement  when 
they  went  before  the  Council.  Dr.  Willoughby  also 
was  comforted  by  Bishop  Gardiner,  wdio  told  him  he 
should  not  be  made  responsible  for  the  articles  which 
he  had  been  induced  to  put  up ;  he  had  done  his 
duty  if  they  were  true,  and  if  they  were  false  the 
blame  should  rest  with  the  promoters.^ 

Heresy  was  getting  rebuked.  On  the  14th  May 
one  Robert  Wisdom,  clerk,  whom  the  Council  had 
committed  to  the  custody  of  Richard  Cloney, 
apparitor  -  general  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  was 
obliged  to  find  surety  of  £40  that  he  would  remain 
"  true  and  faithful  prisoner  "  without  attempting  to 
escape,  and  pay  for  his  meat  and  drink,  l)edding  and 
other  comforts  until  discharged  of  his  imprisonment. 
Three  friends,  a  scrivener,  a  mercer,  and  a  stainer 
of  London,  all  well-to-do  citizens  no  doubt,  the  last 
of  whom,  John  Wisdom,  was  presumably  a  near 
relation,  agreed  to  stand  surety  for  him ;  -  and  he 
remained  in  what  must  have  been  comparatively  easy 

»  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  pp.  326-8. 
2  Foxe,  vol.  v.,  App.  No.  12.     (Extract  I'rom  Bonner's  Register,  f.  44.) 


38o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

durance   for   some  weeks.      On   Relic    Sunday,    8tli 

July/  he  and  two  other  clergymen,  the  one  named 

Thomas  Becon,  otherwise  Theodore  Basil,  the  other 

Recauta-  Robert  Sinorleton,   recanted  their  heresies  at  Paul's 

Paul's     Cross ;    "  and  the  said  Thomas  Becon  cut  in  pieces 

Cross,      at  his  said  recanting  eleven  books  which  he  had  made 

and  caused  to   be    printed,   wherein  was  contained 

heresies."  ^ 

Who  were  these  men  ?  Robert  Wisdom  was, 
according  to  Foxe,  "  parish  priest  of  St.  Margaret's 
Lothbury,"  but  according  to  Wriothesley,  "  curate 
of  Aldermary  under  Dr.  Cromer "  (meaning  Dr. 
Crome).  As  a  matter  of  fact,  he  held  no  London 
benefice,  and  "parish  priest"  evidently  does  not 
mean  incumbent.  He  may  have  assisted  at  times 
in  the  services  of  St.  Margaret  Lothbury,  and  also 
been  curate  at  St.  Mary's  Aldermary  to  the  very 
popular  Dr.  Crome,  who  himself  had  a  considerable 
tendency  at  times  to  get  into  hot  water.  We  shall 
hear  of  him  again  before  the  end  of  the  reign.  Later, 
under  Edward  VL  he  got  promotion,  and  after  a 
sojourn  abroad  in  Mary's  time,  he  came  back  and 
was  made  Archdeacon  of  Ely  under  Queen  Elizabeth. 
But  his  recantation  at  this  time  at  Paul's  Cross  seems 
to  have  been  as  full  as  could  have  been  expected. 
He  began  :  "  Worshipful  audience,  I  am  placed  this 
day  in  the  midst  of  these  two  penitents,  as  one  who 
professes  himself  earnestly  sorry  that  with  my  earnest 
countenance,  gestures,  behaviour,  and  speech  I  have, 
under  the  name  of  God's  Word  and  pretence  of 
Christian  charity,  so  much  slandered  the  true  doctrine 
of  our  religion  and  defamed  the  charity  of  the  public 
ministers  of  common  justice."  He  goes  on  to  say 
that  he  had  preached  against  Free  Will  and  against 
praying   to    Saints,   and   he   regretted   that   he  had 

^  Relic  Sunday,  according  to  the  Saruin  Missal,  was  the  first  Sunday  after 
the  Translation  of  St.  Thomas  "the  Martyr,"  which  was  on  the  7th  .July. 
Nicolas's  Chronology  is  misleading  on  this  point. 

"  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  142-3. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  381 

therein  spoken  untruly.  He  wished  those  whose 
ways  he  had  followed  would  recant  likewise,  and 
ignorant  people  would  soon  be  content  to  accept 
"  the  most  perfect  Christian  doctrine  now  set  forth 
by  the  King's  Majesty "  (the  book  of  Necessary 
Doctrine  had  by  this  time  been  published).  He  had 
preached  against  charity  that  men  could  not  live 
well  in  Christ,  but  they  were  persecuted  and  im- 
prisoned for  the  truth's  sake ;  but  in  this  he  had 
slandered  common  justice,  for  he  had  known  no  man 
in  particular  to  have  been  persecuted  for  the  truth, 
but  several  justly  executed  for  their  false  doctrine 
— such  as  Lambert,  Barnes,  Garret,  and  Jerome. 
"This,"  he  added,  "is  a  realm  of  justice  and  of  no 
persecution  of  them  that  be  good" ;  and  he  denounced 
as  untrue  what  his  companion,  Thomas  Becou,  had 
said  in  his  book  of  David's  Har'p  "  that  persecution 
is  a  token  of  the  true  Gospel," 

Becon  was  a  man  of  about  thirty-one  years  of  age, 
who  had  been  five  years  in  Orders.  His  abjuration 
was  quite  as  humble.  He  acknowledged  having 
during  the  past  three  years  preached  false  doctrine 
iu  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  which  he  recanted  there.  He 
had  then  removed  into  Kent,  where  he  lay  hid  for 
a  time  under  the  apparel  of  a  layman,  calling  himself 
Theodore  Basile,  and  under  that  counterfeit  name 
had  written  mischievous  books  and  got  them  printed. 
He  deplored  his  own  pride  and  folly  in  the  books 
that  he  had  written,  of  which  he  gave  particular 
instances ;  and  he  had  given  special  offence  before 
his  first  recantation  by  preaching  against  praying  to 
Saints,  against  the  continency  of  priests,  against 
prayer  for  the  dead,  and  against  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Altar.  He  had  also  preached  in  derogation 
of  the  Sacraments  of  Confirmation  and  Extreme 
Unction.  He  then  recanted  a  number  of  specific 
errors  contained  in  individual  books  that  he  had 
written,  and  in  token  that  he  completely  disowned 


382   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  hk.  iv 

them  he  cut  each  book  to  pieces.  After  this,  being 
released,  he  withdrew  into  the  Midlands  and  rejoined 
Wisdom  for  a  time  in  Staffordshire.  Under  Edward 
VL  he  soon  got  a  city  living,  became  Archbishop 
Cranmer's  chaplain  and  a  prebendary  of  Canterbury 
Cathedral.  Under  Mary  he  was  committed  to  the 
Tower,  but,  being  released,  escaped  abroad  ;  then, 
returning  after  her  death,  he  was  restored  to  his 
benefices,  and  he  lived  some  years  into  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth  as  a  rather  notable  preacher. 

Robert  Singleton  had  been  a  chaplain  of  Anne 
Boleyn's,  but  very  little  is  known  of  him — little, 
certainly,  that  is  to  his  credit.^  His  recantation  was 
so  brief  that  it  may  well  be  given  in  his  own  words 
unabbreviated : — 

"  Worshipful  audience,"  he  said,  "  my  companions 
here  present  have  spoken  unto  you  many  words  for 
declaration  of  themselves.  I  shall  conclude  in  a  few, 
which  be  these.  I  am  an  unlearned  fantastical  fool. 
Such  hath  been  my  preaching,  and  such  hath  been 
my  writing,  which  I  here  before  you  all  tear  in 
pieces.     And  to  the  intent  no  man  should  misreport 

^  He  was  suspected,  Foxe  tells  us,  though  unjustly,  of  the  murder  of 
Robert  Packington,  mercer  of  London,  who  was  shot  by  a  gun  on  a  misty 
morning,  13th  November  1536,  on  his  way  from  his  house  at  Soper  Lane  to 
St.  Thomas  of  Acres  to  hear  mass  (see  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  59) ;  Foxe, 
V.  600.  In  the  spring  of  that  year  we  find  him  at  Dover,  where  he  had  been 
apparently  to  secure  the  arrest  of  one  Friar  Patrick,  wlio  was  sent  up  to 
Cromwell  {L.  P.,  x.  612,  640).  Two  years  later  he  reported  to  Cromwell 
what  he  called  "a  sinister  and  seditious  sermon,"  preached  by  Dr.  Cotes  at 
Sheen  Charterhouse  on  Easter  Day,  in  which  the  preacher  had  said  no  man 
was  bound  to  do  the  King's  commandment  if  it  were  against  the  law  of  God 
{L.  P.,  XIII.  i.  819).  After  this  recantation,  it  appears,  he  sufl'ered  as  a 
traitor  for  stirring  up  sedition,  though  Foxe  assures  us,  on  his  own  testi- 
mony (!),  that  he  was  not  guilty  of  this  either.  And  he  is  mentioned  by  the 
Marty rologist  at  the  end  of  his  eighth  book  in  a  list  of  men  "  who  all 
recanted  in  King  Henry's  time,  and  yet  good  soldiers  after  in  the  Church  of 
Christ."  Foxe,  v.  600,  696.  Gardiner,  however,  writing,  even  from  prison, 
to  the  Protector  Somerset  in  the  first  year  of  Edward  VL,  says:  "Your 
Grace,  I  doubt  not,  remembereth  Siugleton's  conspiracy "  (Foxe,  vi.  52)  ; 
from  which  it  may  be  inferred  that  Somerset  himself  had  no  doubt  of  his 
guilt  in  that  matter. 

As  regards  the  murder  of  Packiugton,  Foxe  seems  to  be  right  in  saying 
that  Singleton  was  not  guilty  of  it ;  but  his  statementi  that  Dean  Incent  had 
hired  an  Italian  to  do  it,  and  confessed  the  fact  on  his  death-bed,  is  a 
malicious  scandal.     See  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  p.  297. 


CH.  HI  KATHARINE  PARR  383 

what  I  have  said  I  have  signed  divers  copies  of  that 
I  now  rehearse  with  mine  own  hand,  whereof  each 
man  may  have  the  copy  that  will."  ^ 

It  was  only  four  days  after  these  recantations 
(12th  July  1543),  and  when  everything  seemed  to 
point  to  a  revindication  of  old  doctrines,  that  Henry 
Vni.  married  his  sixth  and  last  wife,  Katharine  Parr,  The  King 
at  Hampton  Court.  She  was  a  widow  of  about  Katiialne 
thirty-one  years  of  age,  who  had  been  twice  married  I'arr. 
already,  and  had  buried  her  second  husband,  Lord 
Latimer,  not  much  more  than  half- a -year  before. 
She  was  certainly  more  than  twenty  years  the  King's 
junior,  and,  no  doubt,  attractive.  Learned  she  also 
was,  like  some  other  distinguished  ladies  of  that  day, 
and  in  her  heart  a  friend  of  "  the  New  Learning,"  as 
the  King  surely  must  have  known  even  then.  Yet 
little  more  than  a  fortnight  after  her  union  with  the 
King  a  beacon-fire  was  lighted  at  Windsor  to  warn 
all  England  that  the  New  Learning  must  be  on  its 
guard. 

The  Necessary  Doctrine  had  been  given  to  the 
w^orld,  and  the  bishops  and  clergy  seemed  to  have 
resumed  their  natural  position  as  guardians  of  the 
Faith.  But,  of  course,  there  were  always  tares 
among  the  wheat,  and  these  had  been  multiplying 
consideral^ly  since  the  first  alarm  from  the  Act  of  the 
Six  Articles  had  sul^sided.  Moreover,  there  was 
always  Royal  Supremacy  ;  for  Henry  had  not,  after 
all,  been  driven  by  political  repentance  to  make  his 
peace  with  Rome,  and  if  he  felt  perfectly  safe  he 
might  possibly  encourage  the  tares  even  now,  much 
in  the  fashion  he  had  done  before ;  for  he  was 
"  Supreme  Head  "  of  the  Church,  with  none  to  con- 
trol him.  But  just  for  the  present  he  was  intent 
on  burning  the  tares.  The  Windsor  men  had  to 
expiate  their  offences. 

One   of  them,  indeed,  was  happily  spared  ;    for 

'  Foxe,  vol.  v.,  A  pp.  No.  12. 


384  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Marbeck,  the  organist,  was  pardoned ;  and  of  those 
not  connected  with  Windsor,  Dean  Haynes  was 
released  on  the  5th  July  "  after  a  good  lesson 
and  exhortation,  with  a  declaration  of  the  King's 
mercy  and  goodness  towards  him,"  on  a  recog- 
nisance binding  him  to  attend  the  Council  any 
time  that  he  might  be  summoned  within  the  next 
five  months,  and  answer  all  such  things  as  might 
be  laid  against  him.^  There  were  also  a  few  other 
notable  persons  in  custody  for  heresy,  who  received 
their  pardons  later.     But  on  the  28th  July "'  Anthony 

i^umedlt  Peerson,  Robert  Testwood,  and  Henry  Filmer  were 

Windsor,    publicly  burned  at  Windsor. 

We  have  already  seen  how  Testwood  and  one 
Benett,  along  with  Marbeck,  were  summoned  before 
the  Council  in  March.  Benett,  it  appears,  was  not 
sent  to  Windsor  to  suffer  with  the  other  three, 
because  he  fell  ill  in  the  Bishop  of  London's  prison.^ 
As  to  Anthony  Peerson,  whose  name  was  sometimes 
written  Parson,  it  may  perhaps  be  suspected  that 
he  was  the  same  man  twice  named  "  Sir  Thomas 
Parson  "  in  the  Privy  Council  record.  For  Anthony 
Peerson  seems  to  have  been  the  most  important  of 
the  three  Windsor  victims,  the  other  heretics  there 
apparently  having  been  his  followers.  His  story, 
derived  from  Foxe,  is  briefly  as  follows  : — 

Autiiony         Hc  was  a  preacher  who  visited  Windsor  a  good 

Peersou.  ^j^^j  about  1540,  and  people  flocked  to  his  sermons 
both  there  and  in  the  country.  He  seems  to  have 
been  unmolested  till  Dr.  London  was  made  a  pre- 
bendary of  Windsor.  But  in  that  case  the  interval 
was  probably  not  a  long  one ;  for  Dr.  London  was 
made  prebendary  of  Windsor  in  that  very  year,  1540, 
and  was  installed  on  the  30th  September.*     At  this 

^  Daseiit's  Acts  of  Privy  Council,  i.  151. 

^  This  is  the  date  given  by  Wriothesley  and  Stow.  Foxe,  in  the  Almanack 
at  the  beginning  of  his  works,  makes  the  18th  the  day  of  these  "martyrdoms"  ; 
but  lie  seems  to  be  in  error. 

^  See  Foxe,  v.  494.  ■•  Le  Neve's  Fasii,  iii.  393,  ed.  Hardy. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  385 

time,  we  are  informed  by  our  Puritan  authority  that 
the  clergy  of  St.  George's  Chapel,  "  for  the  most 
part,  favored  the  Gospel "  ;  which,  indeed,  was  just 
what  might  be  expected  in  a  Chapel  Royal  after 
Cromwell's  long  ascendancy,  notwithstanding  that  the 
King's  quondam  Vicegerent  had  been  put  to  death  just 
two  months  before,  attainted  as  a  heretic  and  traitor. 
At  his  first  residence  dinner  Dr.  London  could  not 
help  telling  his  fellow -prebendaries  that  ill  reports 
were  spread  of  them,  and  some  awkward  conversation 
arose.  Afterwards  he  obtained  fuller  knowledge  from 
one  William  Simons,  a  lawyer,  who  showed  him  notes 
of  sermons  preached  by  Anthony  Peerson  "  against 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  and  their  popish  mass," 
which  seemed  to  justify  an  indictment  for  heresy. 
For  whatever  our  sympathies  may  be,  we  must 
remember  that  "  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  and 
their  popish  mass  "  was  at  this  time  upheld  by  a  very 
stringent  law  (that  is  to  say,  if  mass  could  be 
"  popish "  without  the  Pope),  and  the  wonder  is, 
not  that  the  law  was  put  in  operation  sometimes, 
but  that  it  was  boldly  defied  or  ignored  by  any 
preacher  at  a  seat  of  royalty  like  Windsor.  This 
immunity  lasted,  to  all  appearance,  between  two  and 
three  years.  Nay,  Peerson,  there  seems  no  doubt, 
was  not  only  protected  by  Archbishop  Cranmer's 
Commissary,  but  was  even  commanded  by  him  on 
Palm  Sunday,  1543,  "to  read  and  expound  the  bible 
in  All  Hallows'  Church,  Canterbury."  ^  It  looks  as 
if  the  Commissary  had  been  a  little  overbold ;  for 
he  ought  to  have  known  that  by  that  time  Dean 
Haynes  and  others  had  already  been  sent  for  by  the 
Council,  who  were  also  much  disturbed  about  the 
"  evil  opinions  "  of  "  Sir  Thomas  Parson,  clerk."  But 
perhaps,  though  the  information  against  him  is  dated 
in  September  1543,  the  Palm  Sunday  referred  to 
may  not  have  been    of  that  year.      In   that  year, 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  313. 
VOL.  II  2  c 


386  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

however,  undoubtedly  it  was  that  Dr.  London,  with 
the  aid  of  Simons,  drew  up  an  information  against 
Peerson,  and  put  it  in  the  hands  of  Bishop  Gardiner, 
who,  by  his  influence  with  the  King,  got  a  privy 
search  made  in  Windsor  for  such  books  and  letters 
as  Peerson  had  sent  out/ 

As  to  the  other  Windsor  heretics,  let  us  first  say 
Marbeck.  a  word  about  Marbeck  who  escaped,  but  who  was 
still  in  prison  when  his  companions  were  burned, 
for  he  did  not  receive  his  pardon  till  October.  This 
pardon  cites  part  of  the  contents  of  his  indictment, 
by  which  it  appears  that  he  wrote  against  the  Sacra- 
ment of  the  Altar,  afiirming  contemptuously  "  that 
the  holy  Mass,  when  the  priest  doth  consecrate  the 
body  of  Our  Lord,  is  polluted,  deformed,  sinful  and 
open  robbery  of  the  glory  of  God,  from  the  which  a 
Christian  heart  ought  both  to  abhor  and  flee ;  and 
the  elevation  of  the  Sacrament  is  the  similitude  of 
the  setting  up  of  images  of  the  calves  in  the  Temple 
builded  by  Jeroboam,  and  that  it  is  more  abomina- 
tion than  the  Sacrifice  done  by  the  Jews  in  Jeroboam's 
Temple  to  those  calves ;  and  that  certain  and  sure 
it  is  that  Christ  himself  is  made  in  this  Mass  men's 
laughing  stock."  ^ 

It  must  be  acknowledged  that  this  was  pretty 
strong  language,  and  presumably  Marbeck  had  to 
declare  his  regret  for  it  before  he  received  his  pardon  ; 
for  the  prosecution  not  only  of  himself  but  also  of 
the  three  others  who  were  burned,  was  in  pursuance 
of  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles.  But  surely  he  too, 
like  Peerson,  must  have  had  some  encouragement  to 
believe  that  the  Act  was  a  dead  letter  when  he 
ventured  so  plainly  to  defy  it.  He  was  also  arraigned 
for  havincr  "  with  his  own  hand  gathered  out  of  divers 
men's  writings  certain  things  that  were  expressly 
against  both  the  Mass  and  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar."  ^     From  the  information  Foxe  oives  about  his 

o 
J  Foxe,  V.  472-4.  '^  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  327  (9).  =*  Hall,  p.  258. 


cH.m  KATHARINE  PARR  387 

five  different  examinations,  it  would  indeed  appear 
that  lie  was  very  diligent  with  his  pen,  and,  though 
not  a  Latin  scholar,  had  half  made  an  English  con- 
cordance to  the  Bible  on  the  model  of  an  existing 
Latin  one ;  he  had  also  made  extracts  from  the 
writings  of  Calvin,  which  he  explained  that  he  had 
copied  before  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles  was  passed. 
From  these  I  imagine  came  the  quotations  given  in 
his  pardon,  though  I  have  not  verified  them.^  He 
perhaps  got  his  pardon  the  more  easily  on  account  of 
his  musical  talent ;  for  many  would  have  regretted 
the  loss  of  the  organist  of  St.  George's  Chapel. 

Of  the  other  two  actual  victims,  Testwood  was  a  Testwood. 
singer  in  the  same  chapel,  who  had  been  many  years 
there,  and  who  seems  on  one  occasion  to  have  known 
some  secrets  of  State  before  they  were  known  to 
others.  By  Foxe's  account,  he  had  made  himself 
obnoxious  (it  must  have  been  in  1534),  by  railing  at 
the  Pope  and  denying  that  he  was  rightfully  head 
of  the  Church,  which,  he  said,  every  king  ought 
to  be  in  his  own  realm  under  Christ.  The  words 
were  spoken  at  the  common  table,  and  created  a 
commotion.  Master  Ely,  one  of  the  chantry  priests, 
rose  up  from  the  table  in  disgust,  and  when  Test- 
wood  followed  him  afterwards,  "  would  not  come 
nigh  him  but  did  spit  at  him,  saying  to  others  that 
walked  by,  '  Beware  of  this  fellow,  for  he  is  the 
greatest  heretic  and  schismatic  that  ever  came  into 
Windsor.' "  Ely  also  complained  to  the  Dean  of 
Windsor's  deputy,  the  Dean  himself  being  then  absent 
in  London ;  but  the  Dean,  at  that  time  Dr.  Sampson, 
who  was  afterwards  Bishop  of  Chichester,  came  home 
suddenly  at  night  a  few  days  after,  and,  late  as  it  was, 
sent  his  verger  to  all  the  canons  and  other  officials, 
requiring  their  attendance  in  the  chapter-house  by 
eight  o'clock  next  morning.  When  everybody  was  in 
his  place,  after  commending  their  attendance  in  choir 

^  Foxe,  v.  474-85. 


388  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

and  other  duties,  the  Dean  "  began,  contrary  to  every 
man's  expectation,  to  inveigh  against  the  Bishop  of 
A  surprise  Rome's  suprcmacy  and  usurped  authority,  confounding 
sor^'°^  the  same  by  manifest  scriptures  and  probable  reasons, 
so  earnestly  that  it  was  a  wonder  to  hear ;  and  at 
length  declared  openly  that  by  the  whole  consent  of 
the  Parliament  House  the  Pope's  supremacy  was 
utterly  abolished  out  of  this  realm  of  England  for 
ever ;  and  so  commanded  every  man  there,  upon  his 
allegiance,  to  call  him  Pope  no  more  but  Bishop  of 
Rome  ;  and  whatsoever  he  were  that  would  not  so  do, 
or  did  from  that  day  forth  maintain  or  favour  his 
cause  by  any  manner  of  means,  he  should  not  only 
lose  the  benefit  of  that  house,  but  be  reputed  as  an 
utter  enemy  to  God  and  to  the  King.  The  canons, 
hearing  this,  were  all  stricken  in  a  dump.  Yet 
notwithstanding,  Ely's  heart  was  so  great,  that  he 
would  fain  have  uttered  his  cankered  stomach  against 
Testwood  ;  but  the  dean,  breaking  his  tale,  called 
him  old  fool,  and  took  him  up  so  sharply  that  he  was 
fain  to  hold  his  peace.  Then  the  dean  commanded 
all  the  Pope's  pardons  which  hanged  about  the  church 
to  be  brought  into  the  chapter-house  and  cast  into 
the  chimney,  and  burned  before  all  their  faces ;  and 
so  departed."  ^ 

Such  a  graphic  account  of  the  manner  in  which 
Royal  Supremacy  was  established  in  detail,  could  not 
but  be  quoted  in  the  very  words  of  the  original 
informant ;  and  no  other  words  could  so  effectually 
bring  before  our  eyes  the  angry  feelings  and  state  of 
spiritual  disturbance  created  by  this  violent  inter- 
ference with  an  old  system,  with  which  the  whole 
religious  life  of  the  nation  had  been  hitherto  bound 
up.  The  fact  that  the  writer  himself  approves  of  the 
revolution  gives  additional  point  to  his  description. 
But  we  are  concerned  at  present  with  Testwood,  to 
whom,    of  course,   the   new   turn    of  affairs   was    a 

1  Foxe,  V.  465-6. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  389 

mighty  triumph.  What  wonder  that  he  went  on,  as 
he  now  had  been  justified  in  doing,  scoffing  at  old 
things  with  pecuHar  irreverence  ?  He  scoffed  at  the 
candles  and  images  of  wax  offered  by  pilgrims  from 
the  far  western  counties  of  Devonshire  and  Cornwall 
"  to  good  King  Henry  of  Windsor,"  thinking,  perhaps 
with  some  reason,  "  how  vainly  the  people  had  spent 
their  goods  in  coming  so  far  to  kiss  a  spur,  and  to 
have  an  old  hat  set  upon  their  heads."  He  broke  off 
the  nose  of  an  alabaster  image  of  Our  Lady,  and 
trusted  to  Cromwell's  protection  to  shield  him  from 
justice.  He  made  sport  with  St.  Thomas  a  Becket's 
rochet  and  St.  George's  dagger.  Even  in  the  choir 
of  St.  George's  Chapel  he  answered  a  brother  singer's 
*'  0  Redemptrix  et  Salvatrix  !  "  with  "  Non  Redemp- 
trix  nee  Salvatrix,"  the  two  "  striving  there  with  0 
and  Non  who  should  have  the  mastery,"  to  the 
amusement  of  the  profane  and  worldly  minded. 
And  though,  at  St.  George's  feast  within  a  fortnight 
afterwards,  he  received  a  severe  rebuke  from  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  who  "  shook  him  up  "  for  his  pro- 
fanity, nothing  more,  apparently,  could  be  done  to 
him  at  that  time.^  The  particular  act  for  which  he 
was  indicted  in  1543  was  a  jeering  speech  that  he 
uttered  at  the  elevation  of  the  host :  "  What,  wilt 
thou  lift  him  up  so  high  ?  What,  yet  higher  ?  Take 
heed,  let  him  not  fall."  ^ 

Henry  Filmer,  the  third  victim,  was  a  tailor  who  Fiimer. 
had  been  a  churchwarden  at  Windsor,  and  had 
ventured  to  remonstrate  with  his  vicar  about  two 
years  before  on  some  "  fond  and  friarish  tales  "  (the 
vicar  having  previously  been  a  friar)  that  he  had 
uttered  in  his  sermon.  Perhaps  they  were  foolish 
enough,  even  as  figures  of  speech,  and  the  vicar,  it  is 
said,  took  no  offence,  but  promised  "  to  reform  him- 
self." But  Simons,  the  lawyer,  it  seems,  came  in  to 
make  mischief  here  also,  and  spoke  to  the  vicar  about 

1  Foxe,  V.  465-70.  "  Hall's  Chronicle,  p.  358. 


390  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Filmer  in  such  a  way  tliat  at  a  later  meeting  the  vicar 
said  "  he  would  bring  him  before  the  bishop  to  teach 
him  to  be  so  malapert."  Though  troubled  with  a  sore 
leg,  the  vicar  prepared  to  go  with  Simons  to  Salisbury 
to  lay  an  information  before  Bishop  Capon.  The 
opposite  party,  however,  determined  to  anticipate 
him  with  a  charge  of  heretical  preaching  ;  and,  as  the 
vicar  could  not  ride  fast,  Filmer  and  his  company 
reached  Salisbury  before  him,  and  had  the  advantage 
of  speaking  to  the  Bishop  first.  They  laid  their 
information  against  the  vicar  before  he  and  Simons 
had  arrived,  and  the  Bishop  told  them  they  had  done 
like  honest  men.  The  vicar  and  Simons  then  coming 
up,  the  former  was  shown  the  bill  of  complaint 
against  him  which  he  could  not  answer,  and  the 
latter  received  a  severe  rebuke.^  But  Bishop  Capon, 
as  we  know  well,  favoured  the  new  school,  and  was 
not  over  scrupulous  in  many  things. 

In  this  story  we  are  not  informed  what  it  was 
that  Simons  told  the  vicar  to  make  him  alter  his 
friendly  feeling  towards  his  churchwarden.  But  we 
are  at  no  great  loss  for  an  explanation  when  we  read 
the  account  of  Filmer's  indictment  two  years  later, 
as  given  in  the  same  work  a  little  further  on,  as  well 
as  in  Hall's  Chronicle.  It  was  couched  in  these 
words  : — 

That  he  should  say  that  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  is 
nothing  else  but  a  similitude  and  a  ceremony ;  and  also,  if 
God  be  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  I  have  eaten  twenty 
Gods  in  my  days.- 

This,  apparently,  he  said  to  his  own  brother  to 
dissuade  him  from  going  to  hear  mass ;  and  his 
brother  was  forced  to  give  evidence  against  him.  If 
Foxe's  statement  of  the  case  be  true,  his  brother 
was  the  only  witness  brought  against  him,^  and  the 
conviction  ought  to  have  been  illegal,  as  even  that 

1  Foxe,  V.  470-72.  -  Ih.,  488.  ^  Ih.,^.  489. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  391 

severe  law  required  two  witnesses.  But  it  is  clear, 
at  least,  from  the  narrative,  that  the  brother  gave 
unwilling  evidence ;  and,  whatever  may  have  been 
the  case  as  to  the  administration  of  the  law,  surely 
the  oflfence  itself  was  gross.  Such  ribaldry,  no  doubt, 
had  been  going  on  for  a  very  long  time  unchecked,  in 
spite  of  the  severity  of  the  statute.  Bub  this  year 
things  were  taking  a  new  turn,  and  there  was,  for  a 
time  at  least,  greater  vigour  shown  in  searching  out 
offenders. 

In  what  spirit  the  victims  met  their  terrible  fate  I 
will  not  presume  to  judge.  But  the  following  inci- 
dent is  recorded,  which  is  undoubtedly  true  as  to  the 
essential  fact,  and  which  was  repeated  in  later  instances 
during  the  Marian  persecution  : — 

"  Being  all  three  bound  to  the  post,  a  certain  Drinking 
young  man  of  Filmer's  acquaintance  brought  him  a  ll^^^^ 
pot  of  drink,  asking  if  he  would  drink.  '  Yea,'  quoth 
Filmer,  '  I  thank  you.  And  now,  my  brother,'  quoth 
he,  '  I  shall  desire  you,  in  the  name  of  the  living- 
Lord,  to  stand  fast  in  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  01 
Jesus  Christ  which  you  have  received.'  And  so, 
taking  the  pot  at  his  hand,  he  asked  his  brother 
Anthony  if  he  would  drink.  '  Yea,  brother  Filmer,' 
quoth  he,  '  I  pledge  you  in  the  Lord.'  "  ^ 

Whatever  the  words  spoken  among  themselves, 
their  friends,  no  doubt,  sought  to  alleviate  their 
sufferings  by  strong  drink.  It  may  have  been,  per- 
haps, too  much  to  say,  as  men  did  at  the  time,  "  that 
they  were  all  drunk  and  wist  not  what  they  said." 
But  can  we  honour  men  as  martyrs  simply  because 
their  punishment  was  excessively  severe  ?  We  may 
feel  for  them  ;  but  if  their  acts  were  not  good  we 
cannot  honour  them. 

Burning  for  heresy  is  a  repulsive  thing,  whatever 
we  may  think  of  heresy  itself     But  these  burnings  at 
Windsor,  I  take  it,  were  regarded  as  a  sign  that  now, 
1  Foxe.  V.  493. 


392   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

with  the  faith  laid  down  in  a  new  and  orthodox 
formulary  approved  by  the  King  himself,  a  host  of 
irregularities,  hitherto  positively  encouraged  by  the 
Primate  and  his  Commissary,  would  meet  with  an 
effectual  check,  and  that  old  devout  usages,  whether 
superstitious  or  not,  against  which  there  was  no 
positive  prohibition,  might  again  be  practised  at 
liberty.  Thus  Canon  Gardiner  "  moved  the  people  to 
take  again  matins,  evensong,  their  beads,  and  the 
Seven  Psalms,  which  of  late  they  had  cast  away  by 
them  that  preached  against  all  vocal  prayer."  The 
vicar  of  Faversham  also  "  moved  in  confession  John 
Tacknal  to  use  his  'paternoster  in  English  no  more, 
for  he  knew  not  how  soon  the  world  would  change."  ^ 
So,  indeed,  many  had  long  believed  that  old  usages 
must  be  permitted  again.  Thomas  Bleane  of  North 
Mongeham,  when  orders  were  received  to  deface 
images,  had  commanded  the  priest  and  churchwardens 
to  let  them  alone,  "  saying  that  such  ways  should 
continue  but  a  while,  and  that  they  should  see 
shortly."  And  he  had  an  image  with  three  crowns 
near  his  own  seat  still  standing.  Nay,  in  1542,  the 
year  after  the  order  to  take  down  images  was  issued. 
Sir  Thomas,  curate  of  Sholden,  and  Thomas  Sawyer 
actually  set  up  again  four  of  them  which  had  been 
taken  down  by  the  King's  command,  "  for  abuses  by 
pilgrimages  and  offerings."  And  there  was  one 
Vincent  Ingeam,  a  gentleman  of  Sandwich,  apparently 
on  the  Commission  of  the  Peace,^  who  went  a  little 
further  still ;  for  he  not  only  "  repugned  against  the 
doing  of  the  Commissary  in  taking  down  the  image 
of  St.  John  by  the  King's  commandment,"  but  on 
Easter  Monday,  1542,  he  forbade  any  man  to  read  the 
English  Bible,  or  hear  it  read,  on  pain  of  imprison- 
ment,  and  actually  cast   two  men  into   prison,   the 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  293,  294. 

^  L.  P.,  XVII.  285  (3)  ;  xix.  ii.  340  (54).  The  Commissious  of  the  Peace 
at  this  time  are  very  uegligently  iurolled  ;  but  his  name  is  found  in  Com- 
missions of  Sewers  for  Kent  a  little  later.     L.  1'.,  xx.  i.  pp.  315,  324. 


cH.in  KATHARINE  PARR  393 

one  for  speaking  against  what  he  had  done,  and  the 
other  for  showing  him  the  King's  injunctions  on  the 
subject/ 

But  the  friends  of  the  New  Learning  were  even 
more  justified  in  believing  that  another  change  would 
take  place  in  their  favour.  On  the  31st  August  the 
King,  being  then  at  Ampthill,  despatched  a  writ  of 
privy  seal  to  the  Lord  Chancellor  for  a  pardon  to  a 
number  of  others  implicated  in  these  charges  of 
heresy  ;  which  was  accordingly  passed  under  the  Great 
Seal  on  the  5th  September.^  These  were  gentle- 
men and  ladies  about  the  Court,  of  whose  pardon  I 
shall  have  something  more  to  say  hereafter.  The 
pardon  given  to  Marbeck  was  despatched  a  little  later 
— by  privy  seal  from  the  King  at  Woodstock  on  the 
24th  September,  and  passed  under  the  Great  Seal  on 
the  4th  October.^  So  far,  perhaps,  this  indication 
does  not  go  for  much,  and  may  imply  nothing  but 
Court  favour.  But  something  certainly  occurred 
about  this  time,  or  very  shortly  afterwards,  which 
implied  a  good  deal  more. 

I  have  already  referred  to  the  so-called  "  con- 
spiracy" against  Cranmer  by  his  prebendaries,  and 
have  also  given  numerous  pieces  of  information 
derived  from  the  examinations  which  ensued.  It 
will  be  seen  that  this  "  conspiracy  "  had  been  going 
on  for  some  time,  even  before  Dr.  London  had 
alarmed  the  King  in  the  spring  of  this  year  about 
the  prevalence  of  heresy  at  Windsor.  It  seemed  to 
have  come  to  a  climax  just  after  Easter,  when  Dr. 
London  evidently  believed  that  the  net  was  closing 
round  Cranmer  himself.  But  summer  came,  and 
severe  measures  were  taken  only  against  inferior 
persons,  of  whom  some  were  made  to  recant,  some 
to  burn,  and  some  were  by  and  by  pardoned.  Still, 
a  complaint  was  actually  lodged  against  the  Arch- 

1  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  299.  2  i  p^  xviii.  ii.  241  (6). 

^  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.  327  (9). 


394  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

cranmer  bishop,  and  presented  to  the  King  on  behalf  of  the 
ofbythT  prebendaries  of  Canterbury  and  a  number  of  the 
preben-  justices  of  Kent ;  for  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles, 
Canter°  1^  EQUst  be  remembered,  was  to  be  administered  by 
bury.         Justices  of  the  Peace.      And  what  came  of  this  is 

graphically  described  in   a   well-known   passage  by 

Cranmer's  secretary,  Morice  : — 

The  King  on  an  evening  rowing  on  the  Thames  in  his 
barge  came  to  Lambeth  bridge,  and  there  received  my  lord 
Cranmer  into  his  barge,  saying  unto  him  merrily  "  Ah,  my 
chaplain,  I  have  news  for  you.  I  know  now  who  is  the 
greatest  heretic  in  Kent ! "  And  so  pulled  out  of  his  sleeve 
a  paper  wherein  was  contained  his  accusation  articled  against 
him  and  his  chaplains  and  other  preachers  in  Kent,  and  sub- 
scribed with  the  hands  of  certain  prebendaries  and  justices 
of  the  Shire.  Whereunto  my  lord  Cranmer  made  answer 
and  besought  his  Highness  to  appoint  such  Commissioners  as 
would  effectually  try  out  the  truth  of  those  articles,  so  that 
from  the  highest  to  the  lowest  they  might  be  well  punished 
in  example  of  others  if  they  had  done  otherwise  than  it 
became  them.  "  Marry,"  said  the  King,  "  so  I  will  do ;  for 
I  have  such  affiance  and  confidence  in  your  fidelity  that  I 
will  commit  the  examination  hereof  wholly  unto  you,  and 
such  as  you  will  appoint."  Then  said  my  lord  Cranmer, 
"  That  will  not  (if  it  please  your  Grace)  seem  indifferent." 
"Well,"  said  the  King,  "it  shall  be  none  otherwise,  for  I 
reckon  that  you  will  tell  me  truth, — yea,  of  yourself,  if  you 
have  ofi'ended.  And  therefore  make  no  more  ado,  but  let  a 
Commission  be  made  out  to  you  and  such  other  as  you  shall 
name,  whereby  I  may  understand  how  this  confederacy  came 
to  pass."  And  so  a  Commission  was  made  out  to  my  lord 
Cranmer,  Dr.  Coxe,  his  Chancellor,  Dr.  Bellasis,  and  to  Mr. 
Hussey  his  registrar,  who  came  immediately  down  to  Canter- 
bury and  sat  there  to  inquire  of  these  matters.  By  means 
whereof,  every  one  that  had  meddled  in  those  detections 
shrunk  back  and  gave  over  their  hold.  And  then  his 
Chancellor  and  registrar  were  such  fautours  of  the  papists 
that  nothing  would  be  disclosed  and  espied,  but  everything 
colorably  was  hid.^ 

The  last  sentence  comes    upon    us   as   a  sort  of 

^  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformatimi,  pp.  252-3. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  395 

surprise.  All  that  goes  before  it  clearly  implies 
(whatever  the  writer  intended  to  convey)  that  not- 
withstanding the  Archbishop's  remonstrance — and 
how  sincere  that  was  we  do  not  know — the  King  The  Kiug 
determined  simply  to  make  him  judge  in  his  own  cranmer 
cause.  And  so  he  very  effectually  was  made.  He  judge  in 
took  the  depositions  of  a  large  number  of  the  wit-  ciu^eT 
nesses  in  his  own  hand,  and  likewise  made  comments 
in  his  own  hand,  which  may  be  seen  to  this  day 
among  the  MS.  treasures  which  Matthew  Parker 
took  such  particular  care  should  be  consulted  only  in 
his  own  college — now  called  Corpus  Christi  College 
— in  Cambridge.^  But  as  to  Cranmer's  Chancellor 
Cox  and  his  registrar  Hussey,  not  to  talk  of  Dr. 
Bellasis,  a  King's  chaplain,  recently  made  Archdeacon 
of  Colchester,"  it  is  certainly  strange  to  be  told 
that  they  were  favourers  of  the  Papists,  when  the 
character  of  Cox,  at  least,  is  well  known  as  that  of  a 
pretty  strong  reformer,  made  Bishop  of  Ely  in  the 
days  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  Nor  was  there  anything 
in  this  early  part  of  his  career  at  all  inconsistent 
with  his  after-history  ;  for  the  King,  in  fact,  had  just 
recently  selected  him  as  tutor  to  his  little  son, 
Edward.^  Indeed,  he  was  already,  by  recent  pro- 
motions. Archdeacon  and  one  of  the  prebendaries  of 
Ely,  and  a  prebendary  of  Lincoln  as  well.^  How 
could  such  a  man  have  been  unduly  favourable  to 
Papists  ?  But  we  must  note  what  follows,  in  Morice's 
narrative : — 

Insomuch   that   upon   letters  by  me  written   unto  Dr. 
Buttes  and  Mr.  Denny,  Dr.  Lee  was  sent  down,  after  they 

^  See  Masters's  History  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  p.  91. 

2  L.  P.,  XVIII.  i.  346  (62). 

•'  Then,  according  to  Edward  himself  at  the  commencement  of  his  Journal, 
"at  the  sixth  year  of  his  age,"  which  was  completed  in  October  1543. 

''  He  was  made  prebendary  of  Ely  on  its  new  foundation,  10th  September 
1541.  He  was  archdeacon  even  earlier,  on  the  promotion  of  Thirlby  to  the 
bishopric  of  Westminster  in  November  1540.  See  L.  P.,  xvi.  305  (48),  1226 
(11).  He  had  the  prebend  of  Sutton-cum-Buckingham  in  Lincoln  Cathedral 
given  liim  in  June  1542  (Le  Neve's  Fasti,  ed.  Hardy,  ii.  217). 


396  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

had  sat  six  weeks,  by  the  King.  And  he,  by  the  King's 
advice,  did  appoint  to  the  number  of  nine  or  ten  of  my 
lord's  gentlemen,  to  search  both  the  purses,  chests,  and 
houses  of  certain  prebendaries  and  gentlemen,  all  in  one 
moment;  by  means  whereof  such  letters  and  writings  were 
found,  and  that  a  great  number,  that  all  the  confederacy  was 
utterly  known  and  disclosed,  to  the  defacing  of  a  great  sort 
[i.e.  company]  of  their  dishonesties.  And  so,  a  parliament 
being  at  hand,  great  labor  was  made  by  their  friends  for 
general  pardon,  which  wiped  away  all  punishment  and 
correction  for  the  same,  specially  my  lord  Cranmer  being 
a  man  that  delighted  not  in  revenging.^ 

This,  no  doubt,  throws  some  light  upon  the  matter. 
The  secret  inquiry,  even  in  the  hands  of  men  like 
Dr.  Cox  and  the  Archbishop's  registrar,  Hussey,  had 
dragged  on  for  six  weeks  without  results  altogether 
sufficient.  So,  to  quicken  proceedings,  Dr.  Thomas 
Legh  (or  Lee),  the  quondam  Visitor  of  monasteries, 
was  sent  down,  and  his  very  drastic  methods  broke 
up  "  the  confederacy  "  completely.  But  by  and  by 
the  confederates  were  received  to  mercy.  All  the 
secret  records  of  this  one-sided  inquiry  are  now  open 
to  inspection,  and  have  been  transcribed  and  printed, 
for  the  most  part  verbatim.  Archbishop  Cranmer 
himself  would  hardly  have  liked  the  prospect  of  their 
publication,  though  we  see  that  he  did  his  best  to 
and  investigate  the  charges  against  himself,  and,  if  not 

investi-       to  auswcr  them,  at  least  to  shake  the  credit  of  the 
gates  the     witncsscs.      He  had  even  impounded  and  attached 

complaints  .  i       n  c  i 

himself.  to  this  sccret  register  a  copy  or  draft  of  a  letter 
written  by  one  of  the  new  preachers  at  Canterbury 
"  to  my  Lord  of  N.,"  at  a  time  when  it  was  certainly 
thought  that  there  must  be  a  commission  for  heresies 
sent  down  into  Kent,  owing  to  the  complaints  against 
the  Archbishop  and  his  favourite  preachers.  There 
can  be  very  little  doubt  that  "  my  Lord  of  N." 
was  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  and  that  the 
communication  was  very   confidential.      For  among 

'   Nichols's  Narratives,  p.  253. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  397 

various  things  that  it  contained  were  passages  like 
these : — 

Also,  if  my  lord  of  Canterbury  may  know  the  witnesses' 
names  of  the  articles,  he  will  find  some  evasion  by  Dr. 
Gwent's  counsel,  his  Commissary,  and  other,  to  prevent  their 
deposition  and  make  them  insufficient. 

Also,  if  my  lord  of  Canterbury  be  one  of  the  Commis- 
sioners, it  will  stay  many  depositions.^ 

Thus  it  appears  that  Edmund  Shether,  one  of  the 
six  preachers  placed  by  Cranmer  himself  at  Canter- 
bury (for  he  it  was  who  wrote  this  letter),  had  no 
confidence  in  his  archbishop's  fairness  and  imparti- 
ality if  there  w^ere  any  investigation  of  the  consider- 
able increase  of  heresy  in  Kent.  Nor  wxre  his 
apprehensions  at  all  unnatural,  seeing  that  both  he 
and  Series  had  suffered  imprisonment  for  their 
preaching,  though  they  knew  that  they  had  the 
sympathy  of  most  people  in  what  they  had  preached. 
And  I  fear,  it  must  be  owned,  that  a  careful  perusal 
of  the  records  of  this  secret  examination  goes  far 
to  justify  the  suspicions  that  Shether  entertained. 
Indeed,  we  have  seen  already,  from  some  of  the 
evidences  elicited  in  this  very  inquiry,  what  became  of 
the  information  against  Chirden  ;  and  the  inference 
is  a  strong  one  from  Batterste's  words  that  Shether 
and  Gardiner  were  prosecuted  in  revenge  for  the 
prosecution  of  Chirden.  It  was  on  St.  George's  Day 
(23rd  April  1543),  as  appears  from  a  letter  preserved 
among  these  evidences,^  that  Batterste  and  Salter 
procured  signatures  to  the  document  for  Chirden's 
exculpation,  and  that  the  former  declared  that 
Gardiner  and  Shether  "  should  quail  for  the 
troubling  of  the  said  Sir  Humphrey."  What  else 
could  Shether  do  on  hearing  this  but  give  secret 
intimation  to  some  powerful  friend  of  the  position 
in  which  he  found  himself?  And  it  is  quite  clear 
that  his  confidential  letter  to  "  my  Lord  of  N."  above 

1  L.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  p.  359.  2  i^   p^  XVIII.  ii.  p.  342,  §  v. 


398   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

referred  to  was  written  at  this  very  time ;  for  the 
first  part  of  it,  which  I  shall  now  quote  from  the 
abstract  in  Letters  and  Papers,  refers  expressly  to 
this  subject : — 

Reminds  his  Lordship  that  Thomas  Batters  of  Canterbury 
and  William  Salter,  one  of  the  King's  beadmen  of  Christ- 
church  in  the  said  city,  have  procured  a  testimonial  for  the 
honesty  of  Sir  Humphrey  Cherdayn  "  to  the  intent,  as  it  is 
thought,  to  improve  {sic)  such  witnesses  as  Mr.  Gardener 
and  Mr.  Shether  have  brought  in  to  depose  in  their  articles 
objected  against  the  said  Humphrey;  in  the  which  testi- 
monial many  men's  names  be  rehearsed,  as  it  is  thought, 
which  were  not  consenting  to  it.  By  reason  of  the  which 
fact  many  persons  be  discouraged  from  the  disclosing  of  such 
enormities  as  they  know.  And  for  as  much  as  the  said 
Gardener  and  Shether  be  commonly  noted  to  be  accusers 
of  men  (which  indeed  did  nothing  but  upon  my  lord  of 
Canterbury's  commandment),  many  fear  greatly  to  speak, 
although  they  have  like  commandment  given  from  like 
authority. 

It  would  be  a  comfort  to  find,  even  in  these 
secret  records,  anything  to  show  that  such  suspicions 
were  unjust.  For  whether  we  think  heresy  a  deadly 
thing  or  not,  impartiality  in  any  investigation  is  of 
the  utmost  importance.  But,  unhappily,  there  is 
very  little  appearance  even  of  this  great  virtue  in  the 
proceedings.  For,  while  men  of  the  one  school  were 
generally  shielded  from  their  accusers,  their  accusers 
themselves  were  sharply  dealt  with.  It  is  true 
enough  that  the  latter  were  brought  to  their  knees,  and 
some  small  admissions  were  wrung  from  one  or  two 
of  them.  But  is  it  conceivable  that  they  were  fairly 
treated  when  such  things  passed  between  Cranmer 
and  his  clergy  as  these  secret  records  reveal  to  us  ? 
craumer's  "  You  and  your  company  do  hold  me  short,"  said 
JggJ^*'  the  Archbishop  to  Canon  Gardiner  once  in  reply  to 
a  complaint :  "I  will  hold  you  as  short."  ^  He 
had  deeply   resented  Canon   Gardiner's  interference 

1  Z.  p.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  322,  375. 


CH.  in  KATHARINE   PARR  399 

between  him  and  Series  that  Trinity  Sunday  about 
idolum  and  imago,  and  he  had  told  Shether  at 
Croydon  that  he  would  be  even  with  Gardiner,  "  and 
that  shortly."  ^  Elsewhere  he  had  likewise  used 
similar  language.  After  Palm  Sunday  he  saw  Pre- 
bendary St.  Leger  at  Faversham,  and  asked  him 
if  he  had  been  at  home  that  day.  St.  Leger  replied 
that  he  had  been  at  his  benefice.  The  Archbishop 
then  declared  to  him  "  the  procession  done  that  day 
at  Christchurch,"  and  then  said  to  him  :  "  Ye  be 
there  knit  in  a  band  amongst  you,  which  I  will  break." 
He  then  added,  "  Ah,  Mr.  St.  Leger,  I  had  in  you  and 
Mr.  Parkhurst  a  good  judgment,  and  especially  in 
you,  but  ye  will  not  leave  your  old  mumpsimus." " 
Parkhurst  gently  replied:  "I  trust  we  use  no  mumpsi- 
muses  but  those  that  be  consonant  to  the  laws  of  God 
and  our  Prince,"  and  he  hoped  Cranmer  would  be 
good  to  them.^ 

It  looks  as  if  Cranmer  was  really  frightened 
when  he  resorted  to  threats  against  canons  and 
preachers  of  his  own  cathedral,  for  nothing  appar- 
ently but  for  doing  their  duty.*  It  was  exactly  the 
time  when,  to  all  appearance,  he  himself  was  getting 
into  trouble  ;  and  though,  perhaps,  he  had  great  hopes 
of  the  King's  support,  the  date  when  the  King  gave 
him  personal  assurance  of  it  on  taking  him  into  his 
barge  must  have  been  somewhat  later.  His  general 
relations  with  the  King,  however,  were  such  as  to 
inspire  confidence ;  for  in  most  matters  he  could  be 
tolerably  pliant,  and  the  King  could  not  easily  have 
found  elsewhere  a  real  divine  so  heartily  devoted  to 
the  all-important  principle  of  Royal  Supremacy. 

Once  the  examination  was  set  on  foot  the  result 

1  L.  ]'.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  321-2,  349  (§  14),  367. 

"  St.  Letter  writes  it  "mumpsimuiides,"  which  is  a  curious  corruption. 
The  expression  arose  out  of  an  old  story  of  an  illiterate  clerk  wiio  had  been 
accustomed  to  misread  the  word  "sumpsinius"  as  "mumpsimus,"  and 
declared  he  would  not  give  up  his  old  imimpsimus  for  any  new  sumpsimus 
that  thev  misfht  talk  of. 

3  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  349,  372,  378.  *  See  L.  P.,  u.s.  p.  372. 


400  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

His  was   not    doubtful.       Dr.    Willoughby   had    evaded 

are  cowd.  responsibility  from  the  first,  and  answered  inquiries 
fully  about  others.  Shether  wrote  a  manly  letter 
expressing  regret  if  he  had  offended,  but  pleading 
that  he  had  been  desired  by  Sir  John  Baker,  a  leading 
member  of  Council,  once  Attorney -General,  "  to 
mark  the  chiefest  fautors  of  new  opinions."  ^  Canon 
Gardiner  expressed  great  penitence  for  not  having 
borne  to  his  archbishop  so  good  a  heart  "  as  a  true 
child  ought  to  bear,"  and  laid  the  blame  on  Dr. 
Willoughby  for  bringing  his  bills  to  Canterbury.^ 
Prebendary  Milles  wrote  from  prison,  suffering  from 
cold  and  illness,  acknowledging  his  unkindness  in 
subscribing  to  certain  articles,  though  it  was  done 
unadvisedly  at  the  instigation  of  another.^  All  had 
tripped  somehow  or  other,  though  not  one  of  these 
seems  to  have  been  chargeable  with  more  than  indis- 
cretion at  the  utmost.  But  there  was  one  real 
mischief-maker  in  Dr.  London,  who  in  his  zeal  for 
hunting  heretics  had  apparently  stated  more  than  he 
could  justify,  and  was  brought  to  condign  punishment 
accordingly,  as  we  shall  see  presently. 

Of  course  people  did  not  know  the  precise  moment 
that  the  tide  had  turned,  or  that  it  was  going  to  turn 
at  all.  But  we  can  tell  the  time  pretty  well  now,  as 
the  great  martyrologist  has  preserved  to  us  about 
this,  as  about  other  things,  a  vast  amount  of  gossiping 
detail  which  we  have  only  to  read  without  his  bias  as 
simple  matter  of  fact,  and  we  shall  not  fail  to  under- 
stand what  it  all  means,  even  better  than  he  himself 
did.  I  therefore  make  no  apology  for  a  rather  long 
extract,  in  which  I  have  only  inserted  in  brackets 
some  slight  rectifications  and  comments,  mainly  for 
the  sake  of  chronological  precision,  and  sometimes  to 
bring  the  narrative  back  into  the  times  of  Henry  VIH., 
getting  rid  of  erroneous   titles  which   belong  to  an 

1  L.  P.,  U.S.  p.  353.  2  j^  p^  „  ^_  pp_  338^  343. 

-  L.  P.,  U.S.  pp.  373,  378. 


cH.iH  KATHARINE  PARR  401 

after  date.     After  describing  the  burnings  at  Windsor, 
Foxe  goes  on  to  tell  us  : — 

Ye  have  heard  before  of  one  Robert  Bennet/  how  he  was 
at  the  first  apprehended  with  the  other  four  persons  aforesaid, 
and  committed  to  the  Bishop  of  London's  prison ;  and  about 
the  time  he  should  have  gone  to  Windsor,  he  fell  sick  of  the 
pestilence,  by  means  whereof  he  remained  still  in  prison. 

This  Bennet  and  Simons  ^  (ye  shall  understand)  were  the 
greatest  familiars  and  company  keepers  that  were  in  all 
Windsor,  and  never  lightly  swerved  the  one  from  the  other, 
saving  in  matters  of  religion,  wherein  they  could  never  agree. 
For  Bennet,  the  one  lawyer,  was  an  earnest  gospeller,  and 
Simons,  the  other  lawyer,  a  cankered  papist ;  but  in  all  other 
worldly  matters  they  cleaved  together  like  burrs. 

This  Bennet  had  spoken  certain  words  against  their  little 
round  god  [i.e.  the  consecrated  host],  for  which  he  was  as  far 
in  as  the  best,  and  had  suffered  death  with  the  others  if  he 
had  gone  to  Windsor  when  they  went.  And  now  that  the 
matter  was  all  done  and  finished,  it  was  determined  by  the 
Bishop  of  Salisbury  [Dr.  Capon],  that  Robert  Ockam,  on  the 
Monday  after  the  men  were  burned,  should  go  to  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester  [Gardiner],  with  the  whole  process  done  at  the 
sessions  the  Thursday  before.  [This  Thursday  must  have 
been  26th  July,  two  days  before  the  men  were  burned.] 

Then  Simons,  at  Bennet's  wife's  request,  procured  the 
Bishop  of  Salisbury's  favorable  letter  to  the  Bishop  of 
Winchester  for  Bennet's  deliverance  [on  what  plea  he  should 
have  been  delivered  if  the  others  were  justly  burned  does  not 
appear] ;  which  letter  Bennet's  wife  (forasmuch  as  her  own 
man  was  not  at  home,  who  should  have  gone  with  the  letter) 
desired  Robert  Ockam  to  deliver  to  the  Bishop,  and  to  bring 
her  word  again ;  who  said  he  would.  So  forth  went  Ockam 
toward  the  Bishop  of  Winchester  with  his  budget  full  of 
writings,  to  declare  and  open  all  things  unto  him  that  were 
done  at  Windsor  sessions.  But  all  their  wicked  intents,  as 
God  would  have  it,  were  soon  cut  off  and  their  doings  dis- 
closed. For  one  of  the  Queen's  men  named  Fulk,  who  had 
lain  at  Windsor  all  the  time  of  the  business,  and  had  got 
knowledge  what  a  number  were  privily  indicted,  and  of 
Ockam's  going  to  the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  gat  to  the  Court 
before    Ockam,   and    told    Sir    Thomas    Cardine    [Thomas 

1  See  p.  384,  a7Ue.  ^  William  Simons.     Sec  p.  385,  ante. 

VOL.  II  2d 


402   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Cawarden  of  Bletchingley,  who,  like  Sir  Philip  Hoby,  was 
knighted  the  next  year  at  Boulogne]  and  others  of  the  Privy 
Chamber  how  all  the  matter  stood.  Whereupon  Ockam  was 
laid  for,  and  had  by  the  back  as  soon  as  he  came  to  the 
Court,  and  so  kept  from  the  Bishop.^ 

We  interrupt  the  narrative  here  merely  to  note 
that  already,  within  a  week  after  the  burnings  at 
Windsor,  the  accused  and  the  prosecutors  seem  almost 
to  have  changed  places.  Sharp  execution  had  been 
done  on  the  Windsor  heretics ;  and  Robert  Ockam, 
the  Clerk  of  the  Peace  before  whom  they  had  been 
indicted.,^  was  hurrying  to  Bishop  Gardiner  to  lay 
before  him  the  whole  procedure,  when  he  was  stopped 
on  coming  to  the  court,  and  not  allowed,  to  see  the 
Bishop.     To  proceed  : — 


On  the  next  morrow,  very  early,  Bennet's  wife  sent  her 
man  to  the  Court  after  Ockam,  to  see  how  he  sped  with  her 
husband's  letter.  And  when  he  came  there  he  found  Sir 
Thomas  Cardine  walking  with  Ockam  up  and  down  the  green 
before  the  Court  gate ;  whereat  he  greatly  marvelled,  to  see 
Ockam  with  him  so  early,  mistrusting  the  matter.  Where- 
upon he  kept  himself  out  of  sight  till  they  had  broken  off 
their  communication. 

And  as  soon  as  he  saw  Master  Cardine  gone  (leaving 
Ockam  behind),  he  went  to  Ockam  and  asked  him  if  he  had 
delivered  his  master's  letter  to  the  Bishop.  "No,"  said 
Ockam,  "  the  King  removeth  this  day  to  Guildford,  and  I 
must  go  thither  and  will  deliver  it  there."  [The  King  had 
been  at  Woking  from  the  2ord  to  the  30th  July,  and  was  at 
Guildford  on  the  31st.^  So  this  would  seem  to  have  been 
either  on  the  30th  or  31st  July.]  "  Marry,"  quoth  he,  "  and  I 
will  go  with  you  to  see  what  answer  you  shall  have,  and  to 
carry  word  to  my  mistress."  And  so  they  rode  to  Guildford 
together ;  when  Bennet's  man,  being  better  acquainted  in  the 
town  than  Ockam  was,  got  a  lodging  for  them  both  in  a 
kinsman's  house  of  his. 

That  done  he  asked  Ockam  if  he  would  go  and  deliver  his 
mistress's  letter  to  the  Bishop.     "  Nay,"  said  Ockam,  "  you 


^  Foxe,  V.  494.  -  See  p.  487  ;  iu  Foxe,  u.s, 

3  See  L.  P.,  xviii.  i.  972  ;  ii.  107  (1,  3-8,  13,  17,  23,  24,  etc.). 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  403 

shall  go  and  deliver  it  yourself " ;  and  took  him  the  letter. 
And  as  they  were  going  in  the  street  together,  and  coming 
by  the  Earl  of  Bedford's  lodging,  then  lord  Privy  Seal  [Lord 
Russell,  who  was  "  then  lord  Privy  Seal,"  but  was  not 
Earl  of  Bedford  till  the  following  reign],  Ockam  was  pulled 
in  by  the  sleeve,  and  no  more  seen  of  Bennet's  man  till  he 
saw  him  in  the  Marshalsea.  Then  went  Bennet's  man  to 
the  Bishop's  lodging  and  delivered  his  letter ;  and  when  the 
Bishop  had  read  the  contents  thereof,  he  called  for  the  man 
that  brought  it.  "  Come,  Sirrah,"  quoth  he,  "  you  can  tell 
me  more  by  mouth  than  the  letter  specifieth " ;  and  had 
him  into  a  little  garden.  "  Now,"  quoth  the  Bishop,  "  what 
say  you  to  me  ? "  "  Porsooth,  my  lord,"  quoth  he,  "  I  have 
nothing  to  say  unto  your  lordship ;  for  I  did  not  bring  the 
letter  to  the  town."  "  No  !  "  quoth  the  Bishop,  "  where  is  he 
that  brought  it  ?  "  "  Forsooth,  my  lord,"  quoth  he,  "  I  left 
him  busy  at  his  lodging."  "  Then  he  will  come,"  quoth  the 
Bishop  ;  "  bid  him  be  with  me  betimes  in  the  morning."  "  I 
will,"  quoth  he,  "  do  your  lordship's  commandment "  ;  and  so 
he  departed  home  to  his  lodging.  And  when  his  kinsfolks 
saw  him  come  in,  "  Alas,  cousin,"  quoth  they,  "  we  are  all 
undone  ! "  "  Why  so,"  quoth  he,  "  what  is  the  matter  ?  " 
"  Oh,"  said  they,  "  there  hath  been,  since  you  went,  Master 
Paget,  the  King's  Secretary,  with  Sir  Thomas  Cardine  of  the 
Privy  Chamber,  and  searched  all  our  house  for  the  one  that 
should  come  to  the  town  with  Ockam ;  therefore  make  shift 
for  yourself  as  soon  as  you  can."  "  Is  that  all  the  matter  ? " 
quoth  he ;  "  then  content  yourselves,  for  I  will  never  tiee  one 
foot,  hap  what  hap  will."  As  they  were  thus  reasoning 
together,  in  came  the  aforesaid  searchers  again ;  and  when 
Master  Cardine  saw  Bennet's  man,  he  knew  him  very  well, 
and  said,  "  Was  it  thou  that  came  to  the  town  with  Ockam  ?  " 
"  Yea,  sir,"  quoth  he.  "  Now,  who  the  devil,"  quoth  Master 
Cardine,  "  brought  thee  in  company  with  that  false  knave  ?  " 
Then  he  told  them  his  business,  and  the  cause  of  his  coming ; 
which  being  known  they  were  satisfied,  and  so  departed. 
The  next  day  had  Bennet's  man  a  discharge  for  his  master 
(procured  by  certain  of  the  Privy  Chamber),  and  so  went 
home. 

Now  was  Ockam  all  this  while  at  my  lord  Privy  Seal's, 
where  he  was  kept  secret  till  certain  of  the  Privy  Council 
had  perused  all  his  writings  ;  among  which  they  found  certain 
of  the  Privy  Chamber  indicted,  with  other  the  King's  officers, 
with  their  wives ;  that  is  to  say.  Sir  Thomas  Cardine,  Sir 


404  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

A  number  Philip  Hoby,  with  both  their  ladies,  Master  Edmund  Harman, 
of  prosecu-  Master  Thomas  Weldon,  with  Snowball  and  his  wife.  All 
Stopped  these  they  had  indicted  by  the  force  of  the  Six  Articles  as 
aiders  helpers  and  maintainers  of  Anthony  Peerson.  And 
besides  them  they  had  indicted  for  heresy,  some  for  one  thing 
and  some  for  another,  a  great  number  more  of  the  King's  true 
and  faithful  subjects;  whereof  the  King's  Majesty  being 
certified,  his  Grace,  of  his  special  goodness,  without  the  suit 
of  any  man,  gave  to  the  aforesaid  gentlemen  of  his  privy 
chamber,  and  other  his  servants,  with  their  wives,  his  gracious 
pardon.  And  as  God  would  have  the  matter  further  known 
unto  his  Majesty,  as  he  rode  one  day  a-hunting  in  Guildford 
Park,  and  saw  the  Sheriff*  with  Sir  Humphrey  Foster  sitting 
on  their  horsebacks  together,  he  called  them  unto  him,  and 
asked  of  them  how  his  laws  were  executed  at  Windsor.  Then 
they,  beseeching  his  Grace  of  pardon,  told  him  plainly  that  in 
all  their  lives  they  never  sat  on  matter  under  his  Grace's 
authority  that  went  so  much  against  their  consciences  as  the 
death  of  these  men  did ;  and  up  and  told  his  Grace  so  pitiful 
a  tale  of  the  casting  away  of  these  poor  men,  that  the  King, 
turning  his  horse's  head  to  depart  from  them,  said  "Alas, 
poor  innocents  !  "  ^ 

"Alas,  poor  innocents ! "  So  mucb  pity  His  Majesty 
could  afford  them.  Their  offence  had  been  merely  this, 
that  they  had  flagrantly  violated  a  severe  law  passed, 
with  the  general  approbation,  only  four  years  before, 
to  protect  from  insult  the  Sacrament  as  it  was  then 
venerated  by  honest  men,  and  some  of  the  ordinances 
of  the  Church.  The  King  had  himself  taken  a  marked 
interest  in  the  enactment  of  that  law,  which  he  had 
manifestly  urged ;  but  the  respect  for  things  sacred, 
alike  by  King  and  Court,  was  perfectly  hollow,  and 
when  there  was  no  particular  object  in  putting  on 
extra  virtue,  the  law  was  treated  with  contempt  by 
men  of  the  most  exalted  station.  Bishop  Gardiner 
was  a  man  of  the  old  school,  somewhat  more  of  a 
lawyer,  indeed,  than  of  a  divine  in  Church  matters ; 
but  he  had  been  trying  hard  to  believe  that  the 
old  faith   could  be  effectually  protected  under  that 

1  Foxe,  V.  494-6. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE   PARR  405 

supremacy  to  which  he  and  others  were  forced  to 
bow,  and  he  was  now  almost  the  only  bishop  left 
who  was  in  earnest  about  the  maintenance  of  that 
faith.  To  him,  accordingly,  the  sad  spectacle  at 
Windsor  had  its  better  aspect.  The  Court,  he  sup- 
posed, was  going  to  be  purged  of  heresy.  The  King 
himself  had  become  alive  to  the  danger  of  encouraging 
profanity  and  allowing  things  sacred  to  be  treated 
with  gross  contempt,  and  Gardiner  had  been  led  to 
believe  that  informations  would  be  followed  up.  Un- 
fortunately, his  chief  instrument  overdid  the  matter. 
Dr.  London  was  caught  tripping,  and  the  final  result 
is  disclosed  in  two  more  short  paragraphs  : — 

After  this  the  King  withdrew  his  favour  from  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester,  and  being  more  and  more  informed  of  the 
conspiracy  of  Dr.  London  and  Simons,  he  commanded  certain 
of  his  Council  to  search  out  the  ground  thereof.  Whereupon 
Dr.  London  and  Simons  were  apprehended  and  brought  before 
the  Council,  and  examined  upon  their  oath  of  allegiance ; 
and  for  denying  their  mischievous  and  traitorous  purpose, 
which  was  manifestly  proved  to  their  faces,  they  were  both 
perjured,  and  in  fine  adjudged,  as  perjured  persons,  to  wear 
papers  in  Windsor ;  and  Ockam  to  stand  upon  the  pillory  in 
the  town  of  Newbury  where  he  was  born. 

The  judgment  of  all  these  three  was,  to  ride  about  Windsor, 
Reading  and  Newbury,  with  papers  on  their  heads,  and  their 
faces  turned  to  the  horse-tails,  and  so  to  stand  upon  the 
pillory  in  every  of  these  towns,  for  false  accusation  of  the 
aforenamed  martyrs,  and  for  perjury.^ 

There  is  no  appearance  that  the  accusations  against 
"the  aforenamed  martyrs"  were  really  false.  Foxe's 
own  statements  show  clearly  that  they  were  trans- 
OTessors  of  an  existing  law.  But  there  is  evidence  in 
the  secret  inquiry  that  Dr.  London  (though  we  know 
not  what  even  he  might  have  said  in  his  defence 
before  a  fair  tribunal)  did  some  things  for  which  he 
had  apparently  no  good  warrant  at  all,  and  aggravated 

1  Foxe.  V.  496. 


4o6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

the  case  against  persons  to  be  impeached  by  state- 
ments which  he  wrongly  imputed  to  some  of  the 
informants.^  How  he  was  led  on  to  this  is  a  matter 
of  speculation.  "  The  conspiracy,"  certainly,  was  a 
very  bold  one  if  the  King  was  quite  innocent  of  all 
that  was  going  on,  and  only  "  withdrew  his  favour 
from  the  Bishop  of  Winchester "  when  more  fully 
informed  of  it.  But  the  discovery,  it  seems,  was  due 
to  Ockam's  arrest  and  the  examination  of  his  papers 
by  the  Council,  who  found  several  of  their  own 
members  and  their  wives  among  those  indicted  as 
aiders  and  maintainers  of  Anthony  Peerson.  Among 
these  were  Philip  Hoby,  who  had  already  been  com- 
mitted to  the  Fleet  in  March  for  this  very  offence,^ 
and  Thomas  Cawarden  (or  Cardine,  as  he  is  called 
above),  with  the  wives  of  both  of  these  gentlemen.  Yet 
Hoby  had  been  released  from  the  Fleet  four  days 
after  his  committal ;  ^  and  Cawarden,  as  we  have  seen, 
maintained  his  place  at  Court,  and  was  in  no  fear  of 
Ockam,  "  that  false  knave "  as  he  called  him,  who 
was  arrested  at  that  very  time,  and  was  having  his 
papers  searched  with  a  result  that  Cawarden,  no 
doubt,  fully  anticipated. 

Hoby  and  Cawarden,  however,  had  been  indicted, 
along  with  a  number  of  others  who,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed, took  the  fact  very  comfortably  ;  for  they  were 
all  courtiers  and  knew  well  enough  what  was  going  to 
be  the  issue.  They  remained  under  indictment  till 
the  end  of  August,  when,  on  the  31st,  the  King 
despatched  from  Ampthill  a  privy  seal  as  a  warrant 
for  their  pardon,  and  it  was  accordingly  passed  under 
the  Great  Seal  by  the  Lord  Chancellor  at  Walden  on 
the    5th    September.      The   persons   named    in    the 

*  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  320,  326,  332.  There  is  rather  a  significant  inter- 
rogatory at  p.  298  :  "Whether  you  said  that  if  every  man  was  so  handled  as 
Dr.  Loudon  was,  there  would  be  many  papers  worn  ;  and  to  what  intent  you 
said  so  ? " 

-  See  p.  376,  ante. 

^  L.  P.,  XVIII.  i.  No.  314  ;  Dasent's  Acts  of  the  Privy  Council,  i.  101. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  407 

document  are  Philip  Hoby  of  Wraysbury,  Bucks,  and  indict- 
Lady  (or  Dame)  Elizabeth  Compton  his  wife  ;  Thomas  "^^^^tiels 
Welden  of  Bray,  Berks ;  Thomas  Garden  or  Caverdeu  quashed, 
of    Bletchingly,    Surrey,    and    Elizabeth    his    wife ; 
Edmund  Harman  of  Langley,  Bucks,^  and  Agnes  his 
wife ;  Thomas  Starnolde  (Sternhold),  gentleman  of  the 
King's  Chamber  ;  William  Snowball,  yeoman-cook  for 
the  King's  Mouth,  of  New  Windsor,  and  Margaret 
his   wife ;    and   John    Westcote    of    New    Windsor, 
yeoman."     The  tide  had  certainly  turned  when  the 
accused  were  pardoned,  though  impenitent,  and  the 
Clerk  of  the  Peace  who  brought  their  indictments  to 
Court  was  locked  up  in  jail ! 

The  state  of  matters  during  the  course  of  the  year 
is  remarkably  illustrated  by  a  letter  of  Cranmer's 
secretary,  Ralph  Morice,  written  from  Canterbury  on 
the  2nd  November  to  two  influential  men,  Dr.  Buttes 
(Sir  William  Buttes,  as  he  afterwards  became)  and 
Anthony  (afterwards  Sir  Anthony)  Denny,  the  former 
of  whom  was  the  King's  physician,  the  latter  keeper 
of  Westminster  Palace,  in  behalf  of  a  clergyman  of 
the  new  school,  Richard  Turner,  whom  Morice  him- 
self, having  the  farm  of  Chartham^  parsonage,  had 
placed  as  "  curate  "  there.  As  he  was  a  stranger  in  the 
country  (he  was  a  Staffordshire  man),^  Morice  writes 
that  he  had  expected  his  teaching  would  have  gained 
the  greater  credit.  "  But,"  he  adds,  "  where  malice 
once  taketh  fire  against  truth,  no  policy,  I  see,  is  able 
to  quench  it."  Turner  had  been  most  assiduous  on 
Sundays  and  holidays  inveighing  against  the  Bishop 
of  Rome,  and  had  made  "  innumerable  people  "  change 
their  opinions,   so  that  his  church,  large  as  it  was, 

'  The  document  gives  Bray  in  Bucks  and  Langley  in  Berks  by  an  accidental 
transposition, 

2  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  241  (6). 

•*  "Chartham"  might  perhajis  be  taken  to  be  a  misprint  in  Foxe  for 
"  Chatham,"  as  "  Chatham  "  is  mentioned  in  the  latter  part  of  the  letter  two 
or  three  times,  and  apparently  the  same  place  is  meant.  But  Chatham  does 
not  fit  the  story. 

■*  See  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biography. 


Turner. 


408   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Attempted  could  not  alwajs  hold  the  audiences  that  came  to 
Sou  oT  ^^^^1'  him.  But  "  the  Popish  priests  "  went  to  the 
Richard  justiccs  with  piescnts  of  capons  and  chickens  and  so 
forth,  and  pressed  their  complaints  even  on  "such 
as  were  no  small  fools,  as  Sir  John  Baker,  Sir 
Christopher  Hales,  Sir  Thomas  Moyle,  knights,  with 
other  justices."  The  prebendaries  of  Canterbury 
were  made  privy  to  the  matter  and  lent  their  aid, 
and  the  Archbishop  with  other  commissioners  was 
appointed  to  sit  at  Lambeth  on  the  examination  of 
these  seditious  preachers.  But  before  Turner  went 
up  to  his  examination,  Morice  obtained  a  favour  of 
Sir  Thomas  Moyle,  who  promised  that  he  would  in 
Easter  week  hear  Turner  preach  "  a  rehearsal  sermon  " 
in  his  parish  church  at  Westwell  of  all  that  he  had 
preached  at  Chartham.  Turner  accordingly  preached, 
both  forenoon  and  afternoon,  on  the  Wednesday  in 
Easter  week,  and  gave  Moyle  so  much  satisfaction 
that  he  dismissed  him  home  to  his  cure  with  favour- 
able words. 

By  this  Morice  hoped  that  he  had  made  Turner's 
appearance  at  Lambeth  unnecessary,  thinking  that 
Moyle  would  have  answered  for  him ;  but  such 
a  clamour  was  raised  that  he  was  sent  for.  He 
defended  himself,  however,  so  well  that  he  was  sent 
home  merely  "  with  a  good  exhortation,"  without 
any  recantation  being  enjoined.  The  "  pope-catholic 
clergy  of  Kent,"  however,  raised  a  stir  through  Bishop 
Gardiner,  pretending  that  he  went  home  in  pompous 
fashion  and  was  met  by  500  persons  with  banqueting 
dishes  to  welcome  him,  whereas  he  came  home  above 
eighteen  miles  on  foot  through  the  woods,  avoiding 
Rochester,  and  reached  Chartham  quite  exhausted. 
The  King,  misled  by  the  malicious  tale,  sent  for 
Cranmer,  wishing  him  to  cause  Turner  to  be  whipped 
out  of  the  country.  Cranmer  accordingly  sent  for  him 
again.  But  Morice  wrote  vehemently  to  the  Arch- 
bishop that  it  was  mere  malice,  and  the  Archbishop 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  409 

pacified  the  King's  wrath.  Home  came  Turner  once 
more  without  blot. 

But  the  papists  devised  a  new  matter,  that  he 
had  preached  erroneous  doctrines  elsewhere  before 
he  came  into  Kent,  had  "  translated  the  mass  into 
English  and  said  or  ministered  the  same,"  and 
had  preached  against  purgatory,  praying  for  the 
dead,  and  so  forth.  He  was  then  convented  before 
the  whole  Council  by  Bishop  Gardiner,  brought  up 
to  London  bound  (as  Morice  understood),  and  com- 
mitted to  prison  for  a  time.  But  now,  while  the 
Archbishop  was  in  Kent  investigating  the  conspiracy 
of  the  prebendaries  and  justices  against  himself. 
Turner  was  sent  down  to  him  to  recant  the  doctrines 
that  he  preached  elsewhere  than  in  Kent.  Morice 
hoped  that  the  King  would  not  allow  learned,  honest 
men  to  be  thus  overcrowed  by  papists,  who  could  not 
abide  to  hear  his  supremacy  advanced.  Why  should 
he  recant  to  the  overthrow  of  500  men's  consciences 
and  more  ?  All  good  subjects  would  lament  it ;  and 
yet  it  would  not  in  effect  be  Turner  but  Henry  VIII. 
himself  who  would  "  most  odiously  recant."  ^ 

Such  was  the  general  tenor  of  the  letter ;  but 
there  was  a  sentence  in  this  latter  part  which  is 
worth  quotation  by  itself  for  its  special  significance  : — 

What  think  your  worships  they  would  attempt,  if  his 
Majesty  were  at  God's  mercy  (as  God  forefend  that  any  of 
us  should  see  that  day,  without  better  reformation),  that 
can  thus  dally  with  his  Highness,  blinding  his  eyes  with 
mists  whilst  he  liveth  and  reigneth  amongst  us  in  most 
prosperity  ?  ^ 

There  were  many  who  must  have  thought  or 
feared  that  the  exclusion  of  papal  jurisdiction  from 
England  could  hardly  last  after  Henry  VIII.'s  day, 

^  Foxe,  viii.  31-4.  The  date  "a.d.  1544"  placed  at  the  head  of  this 
letter  by  Foxe  is  erroneous.  See  abstract  of  it  in  L.  P.,  xviii.  ii.,  at  the  end 
of  Preface.  "^  lb.,  u.s.  34. 


4IO  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

and  that  a  hitherto  unprecedented  condition  in 
Church  and  State  must  naturally  pass  away  with 
him  who  was  the  author  of  it.  Nay,  Henry  VIII. 
himself,  as  we  may  have  occasion  to  notice  further 
on,  had  his  own  misgivings  as  to  the  stability  after 
his  death  of  the  peculiar  edifice  he  had  reared  on 
the  basis  of  Royal  Supremacy. 

Meanwhile  one  thing  seemed  to  be  settled.  The 
Six  Articles  must  not  be  allowed  to  be  too  much  of  a 
nuisance — especially  to  great  people  about  the  Court. 
The  Act  Parliament  met  again,  after  prorogation,  in  January 
Arttief''  1544,  and  one  of  its  enactments  (35  Hen.  VIII.  c.  5) 
modified,  was  a  modification  of  that  famous  Statute,  requir- 
ing that  none  should  be  arraigned  under  the  Act  for 
offences  more  than  a  year  old,  nor  even  then  except 
on  presentments  found  by  the  oaths  of  twelve  men 
before  the  commissioners.  These  provisions,  even  in 
themselves,  must  have  gone  far  to  make  a  number  of 
prosecutions  futile.  Only  two  witnesses  had  been 
requisite,  hitherto,  for  any  prosecution.  Now,  a  jury 
of  twelve  men  must  agree  in  an  information  ;  and, 
apart  from  the  time  limit,  it  would,  no  doubt,  be 
difficult  to  get  twelve  jurors  to  impeach  men  of  any 
considerable  standing.  But  Parliament  was  theoreti- 
cally as  dead-set  against  heresy  as  ever ;  for  it  pres- 
ently passed  an  Act  of  General  Pardon  (cap.  18) — 
this  was  the  Act  under  which  Cranmer's  accusers 
found  mercy  —  for  ofiences  committed  before  14th 
January,  the  first  day  of  the  session,  with  express 
exception  of  all  cases  of  heresy  or  high  treason  for 
which  men  had  been  imprisoned  between  that  date 
and  the  17th  March. 

The  result  of  this  exception  was  that  three  names 
more  were  added  to  the  list  of  martyrs  for  Rome  on 
the  7th  March,  and  it  was  only  owing  to  a  recanta- 
tion that  the  number  was  not  four.  One  of  the 
victims  had  been  active  in  drawing  up  the  indict- 
ment against  Cranmer  and  his  friends  so  lately.     This 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  411 

was  Germain  Gardiner,  Bishop  Gardiner's  nephew/ 
whose  account  of  Frith  the  reader  will  remember ; 
and  it  seems  as  if  his  late  ardour  against  heresy- 
had  been  requited  by  an  indictment  for  treason.  The 
oath  of  Supremacy  could  always  be  pressed  home  if 
any  had  evaded  it,  or  qualified  it,  as  we  have  reason 
to  know  that  many  did ;  and  this  is  the  record  of  an 
indictment  in  which  he  was  included  : — 

Sessions  held  at  Westminster  on  Friday,  15  Feb.  35 
Hen.  VIII. 

The  Jury  say  upon  their  oath  that  John  Heywood,  late  of 
London,  gentleman,  John  Ireland  late  of  Eltham  in  the 
county  of  Kent,  clerk,  John  Larke,  late  of  Chelsea  in  the 
county  of  Middlesex,  clerk,  and  Germain  Gardiner,  late  of 
South wark  in  the  county  of  Surrey,' gentleman,  not  weighing 
the  duties  of  their  allegiance,  nor  keeping  God  Almighty 
before  their  eyes,  but  seduced  by  the  instigation  of  the  Devil, 
falsely,  maliciously,  and  traitorously,  like  false  and  wicked 
traitors  against  the  most  Serene  and  Christian  Prince,  our 
Lord  Henry  VIIL,  by  the  grace  of  God  King  of  England 
France  and  Ireland,  Defender  of  the  Faith,  and  upon  Earth 
Supreme  Head  of  the  English  and  Irish  Church,  choosing, 
wishing,  desiring  and  cunningly  machinating,  inventing, 
practising  and  attempting — that  is,  each  of  them  by  himself 
falsely,  maliciously,  etc.,  choosing,  wishing,  etc.,  and  attempt- 
ing— together  with  many  other  false  traitors  unknown  in 
confederacy  with  them — to  deprive  our  said  King,  Henry 
VIIL,  of  his  royal  dignity,  title  and  state,  that  is  to  say,  of 
his  dignity,  title  and  name  of  "  Supreme  Head  of  the  English 
and  Irish  Church,"  which  has  been  united  and  annexed  to 
his  Imperial  Crown  by  the  laws  and  proclamations  of  this 
his  realm  of  England :  [This  they  have  attempted]  falsely 
and  traitorously  by  words,  writings  and  deeds,  which  are 
notorious  and  public.  Moreover,  that  falsely  and  traitorously, 
and  contrary  to  the  duty  of  their  allegiance,  [they  attempted] 
to  depose  and  deprive  the  same  lord  our  King  of  his 
Majesty,  state,  power  and  royal  dignity,  and  also,  falsely  and 
traitorously,  with  all  their  force  and  power,  [endeavoured]  to 
subvert,  frustrate,  and  annihilate  the  good  and  praiseworthy 
statutes  and  ordinances  of  our  aforesaid  lord  the  King,  made 


1  L.  P.,  XVIII.  ii.  pp.  325-6. 


412   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

and  provided  for  the  estate,  properties,  government,  and  rule 
of  this  his  said  realm  of  England.^ 

We  naturally  wonder  what  act  it  could  have  been, 
on  the  part  of  any  of  the  impeached, 

That  roars  so  loud  and  thunders  in  the  index. 

Larke  had  been  presented  to  a  city  living  forty 
years   before,   which  he  had  retained,   we  are  told, 
till  a  few  years  before   his    death  ;   though   he  had 
meanwhile  held  the  rectory  of  Woodford  in  Essex, 
which  he  resigned  for  that  of  Chelsea,  having  been 
nominated  to  the  latter  by  Sir  Thomas  More  in  1530. 
Executions  So  that  he  was  certainly  a  man  in  advanced  years, 
poneiits  of  ^^^  ^^®  with  Germain  Gardiner  and  John  Ireland  (of 
Royal        whom  uothiug  more  seems  to  be  known  than  is  above 
Supremacy,  g^^^^^jj  suflcrcd  at  Tybum  on  the  7th  March.     But 
Heywood,   after  being  placed  upon  the  hurdle,  re- 
canted and  received  a  pardon.^ 

Both  Convocation  and  Parliament  bestirred  them- 
selves at  this  time  about  that  revision  of  the  Canon 
law,  which  had  been  always  required  since  the  sub- 
mission of  the  clergy,  but  never  could  be  carried  into 
effect.  Two  futile  Acts  of  Parliament  on  the  sub- 
ject had  already  been  passed,  and  now  another  was 
added  to  the  number.^  But  as  regards  heresy,  after 
that  secret  inquiry  by  Cranmer  and  those  three 
executions  for  treason,  it  is  perhaps  not  wonderful 
that  we  hear  little  or  nothing  said  about  it  during 
the  year  1544.  Henry's  orthodoxy — not  in  theory, 
it  is  true,  but  in  practice — was  governed  not  a  little 
by  the  political  Imrometer.  When  there  was  any 
serious  danger  of  the  Emperor  and  the  Protestants 

^  Dom  Bede  Camm's  Lives  of  the  English  Martyrs,  i.  543-7.  Note 
correction  of  date  in  vol.  ii.  655. 

^  lb.  Mention  of  Heywood  occurs  in  Cranmer's  secret  inquiry.  L.  P., 
XVIII.  ii.  pp.  297-8. 

»  Statutes  25  Hen.  VIII.  c.  19,  27  Hen.  VIII.  c.  15,  35  Hen.  VIII. 
c.  16.  Cp.  Wilkins,  iii.  868  :  "  Et  mox"  (after  1st  Feb.)  "habito  inter  eos 
secreto  tractatu  de  Regia  Majestate  adeunda  pro  legibus  ecclesiasticis 
condendis,"  etc. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  413 

coming  to  an  agreement  he  was  not  unwilling  that 
powerful  friends  should  intercede  for  him  with  the 
Pope  himself;  and  so  long  as  the  Emperor  stood 
by  him  he  was  quite  ready  to  listen  to  complaints 
against  innovations  not  expressly  authorised  by  him- 
self. Early  in  1543  he  had  pledged  himself  to  aid 
the  Emperor  openly  in  his  war  against  France,  which 
he  did  in  the  following  summer.  So  in  1544  he  was 
for  some  time  occupied  preparing  to  invade  France  in 
person  and  then  in  the  actual  invasion.  He  besieged 
Boulogne,  which  surrendered  to  him  in  September. 
But  his  faithful  ally  the  Emperor,  who,  just  like  him- 
self, had  his  own  special  interests  in  view,  at  that  very 
time  arranged  a  separate  peace  with  France.  So  now 
at  the  end  of  1544  he  had  to  continue  the  war 
alone ;  and,  what  was  still  more  serious,  as  the  two 
continental  rivals  were  reconciled,  the  Pope  had  good 
hopes  at  last  of  holding  a  General  Council,  which  he 
summoned  to  meet  at  Trent  in  March  following  to  put 
down  heresy.  Moreover,  it  was  perfectly  obvious  that 
Francis  had  the  Pope's  sympathy,  and  might  have 
the  Pope's  pecuniary  aid,  in  the  war  he  w^as  carrying 
on  against  a  schismatic  and  excommunicated  King. 

In  view  of  these  things,  it  may  well  have  occurred,  why 
even  to  Henry's  subjects,  that  Archbishop  Cranmer's  Cranmer 

•'J.  ^  ..  was  com- 

encouragement  01  heretical  preachers  was  a  positive  plained  of. 
danger  to  the  kingdom.  At  all  events,  this  was 
certainly  the  time  when  the  second  of  the  three 
attacks  on  Cranmer  was  made,  as  mentioned  by 
Ralph  Morice,  the  assailant  in  this  case  being  Sir 
John  Gostwick,  "  knight  of  Bedfordshire,"  who 
"  accused  him  openly  in  a  Parliament  for  his  preach- 
ing and  reading  at  Sandwich  and  at  Canterljury." 
This  statement  requires  some  little  correction,  of 
which  presently ;  but  let  us  consider  the  result  in 
Morice's  own  words  : — 

As  touching  Mr.  Gostwick's  accusation,  the  King,  per- 
ceiving that  the  same  came  of  mere  malice,  for  that  he  was 


414  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

a  stranger  in  Kent,  and  had  not  heard  my  lord  neither  preach 
nor  read  there ;  knowing  thereby  that  he  was  set  on  and 
made  an  instrument  to  serve  other  men's  purposes,  his 
Highness  marvellously  stormed  at  the  matter,  calling  openly 
Gostwick  varlet,  and  said  he  had  plied  a  villainous  part  so  to 
abuse  in  open  parliament  the  Primate  of  the  realm  ;  specially 
being  in  favor  with  his  prince  as  he  was.  "  What  will  "they 
(quod  the  King)  do  with  him  if  I  were  gone  ? "  Whereupon 
the  King  sent  word  unto  Mr,  Gostwick  after  this  sort :  "  Tell 
that  varlet  Gostwick  that  if  he  do  not  acknowledge  his  fault 
unto  my  lord  of  Canterbury,  and  so  reconcile  himself  towards 
him  that  he  may  become  his  good  lord,  I  will  sure  both  make 
him  a  poor  Gostwick,  and  otherwise  punish  him  to  the  ex- 
ample of  others."  Now  Gostwick,  hearing  of  this  heinous 
threat  from  the  King's  Majesty,  came  with  all  possible  speed 
unto  Lambeth,  and  there  submitted  himself,  in  such  sorrow- 
ful case  that  my  lord,  out  of  hand,  not  only  forgave  all  the 
offence,  but  also  went  directly  unto  the  King  for  the  obtain- 
ing of  the  King's  favor  again,  which  he  obtained  very 
hardly  upon  condition  that  the  King  might  hear  no  more 
of  his  meddling  that  way.^ 

Now  it  is  certain  that  Sir  John  Gostwick  was 
elected  knight  of  the  shire  for  Bedfordshire  on  the 
22nd  December  1544  for  the  Parliament  summoned 
to  meet  on  the  30th  January  1545."  But  it  is  almost 
equally  certain  that  there  was  no  session  of  Parlia- 
ment held  at  that  date.^  Yet  Gostwick  seems  never 
to  have  sat  in  any  previous  Parliament — at  least,  he 
was  not  returned  for  that  of  1541-1542,  and  we  need 
not  go  further  back, — nor  could  he  have  sat  in  any 
later  session,  for  he  died  on  the  15th  April  following.* 
So  there  is  evidently  some  great  inaccuracy  here. 
But  the  story,  no  doubt,  is  essentially  true,  and  the 
truth,  perhaps,  is  not  difficult  to  surmise.  Sir  John 
Gostwick  was  elected  for  Bedfordshire,  and  feeling 
strongly,  as  many  others  did,  the  serious  dangers 
that  beset  the  country,  traceable,  in  great  part,  to 

'  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  pp.  251,  253-4. 

-  See  Names  of  Members  Heturned  to  Parliament,  Part  I.  App.  xxx, 

^  See  L.  P. ,  XX.  ii.  Pref.  p.  Ivi. 

*  Inqiiis.  p.m.  37  Hen.  VIII.  No.  1. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  415 

the  heretical  tendencies  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, had  said  he  was  quite  prepared  to  complain  of 
them  in  open  Parliament.  Then  he  met  with  the 
severe  rebuff  recorded,  and  how  far  it  accelerated  his 
death  may  be  a  matter  of  speculation.  Perhaps  the 
fear  lest  others,  like  Gostwick,  might  speak  their 
minds  a  little  too  freely  had  something  to  do  with  the 
action  of  the  King  in  countermanding  this  Parlia- 
ment. One  thing,  at  least,  is  quite  clear,  that  in  this 
case,  as  in  the  case  of  the  prebendaries,  Cranmer 
was  protected  from  disgrace  by  the  King's  personal 
interference.  And  so  he  was  also  in  the  third  case, 
which  is  still  better  known,  having  been  dramatised 
by  Shakespeare. 

The  date  of  that  third  case  cannot  be  precisely 
ascertained.  But  before  inquiring  as  to  any  probable 
date,  let  us  get  as  near  accuracy  as  we  can,  dismiss- 
ing the  Shakespearian  version  from  our  minds,  and 
taking  the  whole  story  from  the  original  authority, 
Morice,  whose  words,  I  am  afraid,  it  will  be  impossil)le 
to  abridge  without  injury  to  the  narrative  : — 

As  to  the  third  accusation,  wherein  the  Council  required  Proposal  to 
that  the  lord  Cranmer  might  be  committed  unto  the  Tower  commit 
while  he  were  examined,  the  King  was  very  strait  in  grant-  thr'Towen 
ing  thereof.  Notwithstanding,  when  they  told  the  King 
that,  the  Archbishop  being  of  the  Privy  Council,  none  man 
must  object  matter  against  him  miless  he  were  first  com- 
mitted unto  indurance,  which  being  done,  men  would  be  bold 
to  tell  the  truth  and  say  their  consciences ;  upon  this  per- 
suasion of  theirs  the  King  granted  unto  them  that  they 
should  call  him  the  next  day  before  them,  and,  as  they  saw 
cause,  so  to  commit  him  to  the  Tower.  At  night,  about  1 1  of 
the  clock,  the  same  night  before  the  day  he  should  appear 
before  the  Council,  the  King  sent  Mr.  Denny  to  my  lord  at 
Lambeth,  willing  him  incontinently  to  come  imto  West- 
minster to  speak  with  him.  My  lord,  being  abed,  rose  straight- 
way and  went  to  the  King  into  his  gallery  at  Whitehall  at 
Westminster ;  and  there  the  King  declared  unto  liim  what 
he  had  done  in  giving  liberty  unto  the  Council  to  connnit 
him  to  prison,  for  that  they  bare  him  in  hand  [i.e.  tried  to 


4i6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

persuade  him]  that  he  and  his  learned  men  had  sown  such 
doctrine  in  the  realm  that  all  men  almost  were  infected  with 
heresy,  and  that  no  man  durst  bring  in  matter  against  him, 
being  at  liberty  and  one  of  the  Council,  unless  he  were  com- 
mitted to  prison.  "And  therefore  I  have  granted  to  their 
request,"  quod  the  King ;  "  but  whether  I  have  done  well  or 
no  what  say  you,  my  lord  ? " 

My  lord  answered,  and  most  humbly  thanked  the  King 
that  it  would  please  his  Highness  to  give  him  that  warn- 
ing aforehand,  saying  that  he  was  very  well  content  to 
be  committed  to  the  Tower  for  the  trial  of  his  doctrine, 
so  that  he  might  be  indifferently  heard,  as  he  doubted 
not  but  that  his  Majesty  would  see  him  so  to  be  used. 
"  Oh  Lord  God ! "  quod  the  King,  "  what  fond  simplicity 
have  you,  so  to  permit  yourself  to  be  imprisoned  that 
every  enemy  of  yours  may  take  vantage  against  you.  Do 
not  you  think  that  if  they  have  you  once  in  prison,  three  or 
four  false  knaves  will  be  soon  procured  to  witness  against 
you  and  to  condemn  you,  which  else  now,  being  at  your 
liberty,  dare  not  once  open  their  lips  or  appear  before  your 
face  ?  No,  not  so,  my  Lord,"  quod  the  King,  "  I  have  better 
regard  unto  you  than  to  permit  your  enemies  so  to  over- 
throw you.  And  therefore  I  will  that  you  to-morrow  come 
to  the  Council,  who  no  doubt  will  send  for  you,  and  when 
they  break  this  matter  unto  you,  require  them  that,  being 
one  of  them,  you  may  have  thus  much  favor  as  they  would 
have  themselves,  that  is,  to  have  your  accusers  brought 
before  you,  and  if  they  stand  with  you,  withouten  regard 
of  your  allegations  and  will  in  no  condition  condescend  unto 
your  requests,  but  will  needs  commit  you  to  the  Tower,  then 
appeal  you  from  them  to  our  person,  and  give  to  them  this 
ring  "  (which  he  delivered  unto  my  lord  Cranmer  then),  "  by 
the  which,"  said  the  King,  "  they  shall  well  understand  that 
I  have  taken  your  cause  into  my  hand  from  them;  which 
ring  they  well  know  that  I  use  to  none  other  purpose  but  to 
call  matters  from  the  Council  into  mine  own  hands  to  be 
ordered  and  determined."  And  with  this  good  advice  my 
lord  Cranmer,  after  most  humble  thanks,  departed  from  the 
King's  Majesty. 

The  next  morning,  according  to  the  King's  monition  and 
my  lord  Cranmer's  expectation,  the  Council  sent  for  him  by 
8  of  the  clock  in  the  morning ;  and  when  he  came  to  the 
Council  Chamber  door  he  was  not  permitted  to  enter  into  the 
Council  Chamber,  but  stood  without  the  door  amongst  serving- 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  417 

men  and  lacqueys  above  three-quarters  of  an  hour,  many- 
Councillors  and  other  men  now  and  then  going  in  and  out. 
The  matter  seemed  strange,  as  I  then  thought,  and  therefore 
I  went  to  Dr.  Buttes  and  told  him  the  manner  of  the  thing, 
who  by  and  by  came  and  kept  my  lord  company.     And  yet 
or  that  he  was  called  into  the  Council,  Dr.  Buttes  went  to 
the  King  and  told  him  that  he  had  seen  a  strange  sight. 
"  What  is  that  ? "  quod  the  King.     "  Marry,"  said  he,  "  my 
lord  of  Canterbury  is  become  a  lacquey  or  a  serving-man ;  Cranmer 
for  well  I  wot  he  hath  stood  amongst  them  this  hour  almost  ^''I'p^*^  *» 
at  the  Council  Chamber  door,  so  that  I  was  ashamed  to  keep  ^^J  ^^^°^ 
him  company  there  any  longer."     "  What,"  quod  the  King,  Council ; 
"  standeth  he  without  the  Council  Chamber   door  ?     Have 
they  served  me  so  ? "  said  the  King.     "  It  is  well  enough," 
said  he,  "  I  shall  talk  with  them  by  and  by." 

Anon  my  lord  Cranmer  was  called  in  to  the  Council,  and 
it  was  declared  unto  him  that  a  great  complaint  was  made  of 
him  both  to  the  King  and  to  them,  that  he  and  other  by  his 
permission  had  infected  the  whole  realm  with  heresy,  and 
therefore  it  was  the  King's  pleasure  that  they  should  commit 
him  to  the  Tower,  and  there  for  his  trial  to  be  examined. 
My  lord  Cranmer  required,  as  is  before  declared,  with  many 
other  both  reasons  and  persuasions,  that  he  might  have  his 
accusers  come  there  before  him  before  they  used  any  such 
extremity  against  him.  In  fine,  there  was  no  entreaty  could 
serve  but  that  he  must  needs  depart  to  the  Tower.  "  I  am 
sorry,  my  Lords,"  quod  my  lord  Cranmer,  "  that  you  drive  me 
unto  this  exigent,  to  appeal  from  you  to  the  King's  Majesty, 
who  by  this  token  hath  resumed  this  matter  into  his  own 
hands,  and  dischargeth  you  thereof " ;  and  so  delivered  the 
King's  ring  unto  them.  By  and  by  the  Lord  Russell  sware  a 
great  oath  and  said  "Did  not  I  tell  you,  my  Lords,  what 
would  come  of  this  matter  ?  I  knew  right  well  that  the 
King  would  never  permit  my  lord  of  Canterbury  to  have 
such  a  blemish  as  to  be  imprisoned,  unless  it  were  for  high 
treason."  And  as  the  manner  was,  when  they  had  once 
received  that  ring,  they  left  off  their  matter  and  went  all 
unto  the  King's  person  both  with  his  token  and  the  cause. 

When  they  came  unto  his  Highness,  the  King  said  unto  for  which 
them,  "  Ah !    my  lords,  I  had  thought  that  I  had  had  a  *J^  ^J"^""^ 
discreet  and  wise  Council,  but  now  I  perceive  that  I  am  huked. 
deceived.     How  have  ye  handled  here  my  lord  of  Canter- 
bury ?     What  make  ye  of  him  a  slave,  shutting  him  out  of 
the  Council  Chamber  amongst  serving-men  ?    Would  ye  be 
VOL.  II  2  E 


4i8   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

so  handled  yourselves  ? "  And  after  such  taunting  words 
said  "  I  would  you  should  well  understand  that  I  account 
my  lord  of  Canterbury  as  faithful  a  man  towards  me  as  ever 
was  prelate  in  this  realm,  and  one  to  whom  I  am  many  ways 
beholden  by  the  faith  I  owe  unto  God  " — and  so  laid  his 
hand  upon  his  breast — "and  therefore  whoso  loveth  me," 
said  he,  "  will  regard  him  thereafter."  And  with  these 
words  all,  and  especially  my  lord  of  Norfolk,  answered  and 
said,  "We  meant  no  manner  hurt  unto  my  lord  of  Canter- 
bury in  that  we  requested  to  have  him  in  durance ;  that  we 
only  did  because  he  might  after  his  trial  be  set  at  liberty 
to  his  more  glory."  "  Well,"  said  the  King,  "  I  pray  you, 
use  not  my  friends  so.  I  perceive  now  well  enough  how  the 
world  goeth  among  you.  There  remaineth  malice  among  you 
one  to  another.  Let  it  be  avoided  out  of  hand,  I  would  advise 
you."  And  so  the  King  departed,  and  the  lords  shook  hands 
every  man  with  my  lord  Cranmer,  against  whom  nevermore 
after  no  man  durst  spurn  during  the  King  Henry's  life.^ 

Q^f^tionas  jf  -^g  attempt  to  find  even  a  probable  date  for 
of  the  this  occurrence,  we  should  naturally  presume  that  it 
must  be  placed  some  time  after  the  Gostwick  incident, 
the  second  attack  on  Cranmer  related  by  Morice,  as 
that  incident  itself  occurred  after  the  first-mentioned 
attack,  viz.  that  of  the  prebendaries  and  justices. 
Next,  we  must  note  that  the  King  was  at  West- 
minster and  the  Archbishop  in  residence  at  Lambeth. 
Dr.  Buttes  (Sir  William  Buttes),  the  King's  physician, 
is  very  naturally  attendant  upon  the  King.  Then, 
Lord  Russell  and  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  are  specially 
mentioned  as  taking  part  in  the  proceedings  of  the 
Council.  Bishop  Cardiner,  whom  Shakespeare  brings 
in,  has  nothing  to  do  with  this  matter,  so  far  as  we 
can  learn  from  the  original  story. 

But  if  the  occurrence  was  later  than  the  Gostwick 
incident,  it  must  have  been  during  the  year  1545  ; 
and  we  have  pretty  accurate  information  of  the 
King's  movements  during  the  whole  of  that  year." 
After  spending  the  Christmas  season  at  Greenwich, 

^  Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  pp.  254-8. 
^  Collected  from  the  dates  of  letters  and  privy  seals  for  grants. 


incident. 


cH.ni  KATHARINE   PARR  419 

he  was  at  Westminster  from  the  20th  February  to 
the  23rd  May,  when  he  removed  to  Greenwich  again 
— if,  indeed,  he  had  not  removed  thither  earlier,  for 
Westminster  is  sometimes  a  mere  formal  date,  and 
his  Council  had  been  sitting  at  Greenwich  from  the 
17th  April.  But  from  the  23rd  May  we  do  not 
find  either  King  or  Council  at  Westminster  till 
November,  when  both  of  them  were  there  for  a 
month  continuously,  that  is  to  say,  from  the  22nd 
November  to  the  23rd  December,  except  six  days 
that  the  King  spent  at  Hackney,  from  the  14th  to 
the  19th  December.  In  July  the  Court  had  moved 
to  Portsmouth,  where  the  Mary  Rose  foundered 
before  the  King's  eyes,  and  the  return  journey  was 
very  gradual ;  while  from  August  to  the  beginning 
of  November  the  King  rested  chiefly  at  Woking, 
Oatlands,  and  Windsor.  These  considerations  would 
lead  us,  almost  inevitably,  to  November  or  December 
as  the  date  of  the  Privy  Council  incident,  and  there 
are  really  points  which  seem  to  favour  such  a  date. 
But,  unfortunately,  there  is  one  thing  which  looks 
totally  against  it.  Sir  William  Buttes  died  on  the 
22nd  November  ^ — and  apparently  after  a  long  illness 
— the  very  day  that  the  Council  began  to  sit  again  at 
Westminster. 

If,  then,  the  name  of  "  Dr.  Buttes  "  in  reference  to 
it  be  not  an  error  due  to  a  slip  of  memory  on  Morice's 
part,  this  incident  would  seem,  if  not  earlier  than  the 
Gostwick  incident,  to  be  at  least  not  later  than  the 
middle  of  May.  And  so  far  as  regards  Cranmer  him- 
self, we  have  no  positive  evidence  to  the  contrary. 
Moreover,  there  is  a  gap  in  the  Privy  Council  records 
from  July  1543  to  the  10th  May  1545,  which  will 
allow  us  to  exercise  our  imaginations  as  to  who  were 
present  in  Council  before  the  latter  date ;  but  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk  did  not  attend  the  meetings  recorded 
after  it,  which  were  pretty  frequent,  until  the  6th 

'  See  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biog. 


420  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

June  at  Greenwich,  and  Councils  at  Greenwich  hardly 
seem  to  satisfy  the  requirements  of  the  story.  They 
may  do  so,  indeed,  as  the  Council,  after  being  shown 
the  ring  by  Cranmer,  may  have  taken  boat  to  White- 
hall to  see  the  King.  And  it  is  not  quite  impossible 
that  the  incident  may  have  occurred  in  the  early 
spring,  before  the  10th  May ;  indeed,  there  seems  no 
other  time  for  it  but  the  spring,  unless  we  imagine — 
as  we  should  not  naturally  do — that  Morice  was  in 
error  when  he  wrote,  "  I  went  to  Dr.  Buttes  .  .  . 
and  Dr.  Buttes  went  to  the  King  and  told  him." 

Yet  this  is  not  altogether  incredible.  Sir  William 
Buttes,  indeed,  was  a  very  great  friend  of  Morice  and 
of  Cranmer  also.  But  so  was  another  influential 
courtier ;  and  when  anything  urgent  had  to  be  done  in 
behalf  of  the  Archbishop,  his  faithful  Morice,  we  find, 
was  w^ont  to  write  a  letter  to  the  Court,  to  be  opened 
either  by  Buttes  or  by  Sir  Anthony  Denny,  which- 
ever of  the  two  was  first  to  be  got  at.  Two  such 
letters  have  already  come  under  the  reader's  notice^ 
and  surely  it  is  not  inconceivable  that,  writing  some 
years  afterwards,  Morice  forgot  that  it  was  not 
Buttes  but  Denny  to  whom  he  resorted  on  this 
occasion,  and  who  came  to  the  Council  door  and  saw 
the  Archbishop  ignominiously  waiting  outside.  This^ 
indeed,  is  a  mere  hypothesis  ;  but  if  we  substitute  the 
name  of  Denny  for  Buttes  in  the  narrative,  not  only 
all  the  other  conditions  are  satisfied,  but  some  rather 
interesting  light  is  thrown  upon  further  matters,, 
which  we  now  proceed  to  consider. 

On  the  22nd  November  the  Archbishop  of  Canter-, 
bury  was  present  in  Council,  and  again  on  the  27th 
and  29th,  but  not  on  the  intervening  days,  and  never 
again  till  the  21st  February  following,  when  the 
Council  sat  at  Greenwich.  Yet  Parliament  had 
begun  on  the  23rd  November,  and  he  was  present  at 
every  one  of  the  frequent  sittings  of  the  House  of 
Lords  (which  on  some  days  had  both  forenoon  and 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  421 

afternoon  sittings  during  that  session)  from  the 
opening  day  of  the  session  till  Christmas  Eve,  when 
it  was  dissolved.  So,  of  course,  he  was  resident  at 
Lambeth  all  this  time,  as  he  must  have  been 
when  the  incident  occurred ;  and  the  Council  was 
sitting  at  Westminster — another  of  the  conditions 
required  to  fit  the  story.  Further,  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk  and  Lord  Russell  (who  was  Lord  Privy  Seal) 
both  continually  attended  the  Council  at  this  period 
till  the  22nd  December,  after  which  Norfolk  probably 
went  home  for  Christmas,  for  he  was  absent  on  the 
23rd.' 

So  Cranmer  apparently  felt  that  at  this  time  his 
presence  in  the  Council  was  a  little  embarrassing,  and 
if  it  was  in  spring  that  he  was  so  nearly  committed 
to  the  Tower,  even  in  November  matters  apparently 
were  not  at  all  comfortable.  But  suppose  now  that 
it  was  not  in  spring,  but  that  squabbles  having  taken 
place  in  the  Council  on  the  22nd  November,  it  was  PiobaWy 
that  day — ^just  before  the  opening  of  Parliament —  f5°4j'"^^'^ 
that  the  King  authorised  his  committal  to  the  Tower. 
If  so,  he  was  fortified  by  the  King's  interference  to 
meet  the  Council  again  on  the  27th  and  the  29th, 
after  which  he  was  quite  content  to  be  absent  from 
uncongenial  society.  Any  way,  there  were  reasons  at 
this  time  which  might  well  have  made  old  Coun- 
cillors of  the  King  feel  that  it  was  no  longer  safe 
to  play  ftist  and  loose  vvith  orthodoxy.  For  the 
Council  of  Trent  was  about  to  become  a  fact ;  indeed, 
it  was  formally  opened  on  the  13th  December.  The 
Protestants  of  Germany  were  alarmed  at  the  pros- 
pect. The  authority  of  Rome  was  going  to  be  upheld 
everywhere,  and  in  France  this  year  the  poor  Vaudois 
were  persecuted  wholesale  with  unheard-of  cruelty, 
under  a  decree  which  had  been  left  unexecuted  for 
years.  Henry  himself  had  constantly  maintained 
that,   though    papal   authority  was   gone,   the    faith 

^  See  Dasent's  Acts  of  Privij  Council  and  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Lords. 


422   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

remained  in  his  kingdom  inviolate,  and  his  best 
friends  thought  that  if  this  plea  failed  him,  both  he 
and  the  realm  stood  in  imminent  danger.  He  was 
not  unwilling,  for  his  part,  that  they  should  show 
themselves  zealous  to  put  down  heresy,  and  I  have 
no  doubt  he  gave  the  Council  leave,  if  they  found  it 
necessary,  to  send  the  Archbishop  to  the  Tower.  But 
he  had  always  his  own  secret  policy,  which  he  did 
not  communicate  to  any  one  else. 

No  doubt  there  was  a  general  feeling  that  the 
tide  was  rising  in  favour  of  orthodoxy  again ;  and  the 
very  first  Bill  brought  into  Parliament  that  session 
Bill  for  the  was  ouc  "  for  the  abolition  of  heresies  and  of  certain 
Wilr  °^  books  infected  with  false  opinions."  But  this  Bill  had 
a  rather  peculiar  history.  For  on  its  first  reading,  on 
Friday  the  27th  November,  it  was  committed  for 
examination  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Lord 
Paulet  (i.e.  William  Paulet,  Lord  St.  John,  Great 
Master  of  the  Household  since  Suffolk's  death),  the 
Earls  of  Hertford  and  Shrewsbury,  the  Bishops  of 
Ely,  Salisbury,  and  Worcester  (Goodrich,  Capon,  and 
Heath),  and  Lords  Delawar,  Morley,  and  Ferrers — a 
committee  not  at  all  likely  to  be  too  severe  upon  the 
New  Learning,  since  Cranmer  presided  over  it  and 
the  only  bishop  of  the  old  school  was  Heath  of 
Worcester.  Of  course,  it  was  natural  in  any  case 
(if  there  was  to  be  a  committee  at  all  at  this  stage) 
that  the  Primate  should  preside,  and  Cranmer  had 
not  been  deposed ;  but  the  very  composition  of  this 
committee  suggests  rather  strongly  that  the  object 
for  which  it  was  appointed  was  to  enervate  a  Bill 
which  was,  no  doubt,  intended  to  propitiate  a  clamour 
against  growing  heresies.  It  was  read  a  second 
time,  however,  next  day,  and  after  a  long  discussion 
(post  longam  examinationem  are  the  words  in  the 
brief  record),  it  was  committed  again  to  the  same 
Lords  as  before.  It  was  read  a  third  time  on  Wednes- 
day the  2nd  December,  and  a  fourth  time  on  Thursday 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  423 

the  3rd,  when  it  was  committed  to  the  King's  Solicitor 
to  he  engrossed  on  parchment.  Then  it  was  read  a 
fifth  time,  and  passed  without  opposition,  on  Satur- 
day the  5th ;  and  on  Monday  the  7th  it  was  one  of 
four  Bills  sent  down  to  the  Commons.^  But  of  what 
became  of  it  there  we  have  no  record.  It  was  evi- 
dently never  passed.  Moreover,  we  know  pretty  well 
that  the  King  could  obtain  in  most  matters  from  the 
House  of  Commons  almost  any  result  he  pleased. 

Now,  if  there  be  anything  in  our  surmise  that  it 
was  just  before  the  meeting  of  Parliament  that  the 
Privy  Council  had  so  nearly  succeeded,  as  they 
thought,  in  committing  Cranmer  to  the  Tower,  when 
he  was  again  released  from  an  inconvenient  situation 
simply  by  the  King's  personal  intervention,  a  not 
unnatural  sequel  to  the  incident  may  be  found  in 
the  long  discussion  of  this  Heresy  Bill  in  the  Lords, 
and  the  fate  which  overtook  it  in  the  Commons 
after  finally  passing  the  Upper  House,  a  climax 
being  reached  in  the  manner  in  which  the  session 
was  wound  up  on  Christmas  Eve.  And  here 
there  is  nothing  speculative,  for  the  facts  are  very 
well  known,  and  any  doubts  that  it  might  once 
have  been  possible  to  entertain  as  to  their  having 
been  coloured  are  now  entirely  removed  by  fuller 
documentary  evidence.  On  the  24tli  December  the 
King  himself  came  to  the  House  of  Lords.  The 
Speaker  was  summoned  from  the  other  Chamber, 
and,  according  to  custom,  addressed  him  in  "an 
eloquent  oration  "  ;  to  which,  instead  of  leaving  the 
Lord  Chancellor,  as  usual,  to  make  answer,  Henry 
himself  thought  best  to  reply  with  his  own  mouth, 
giving  as  his  express  reason  for  doing  so,  that  his 
Chancellor  could  not  set  forth  so  plainly  his  "  mind 
and  meaning  "  and  "  the  secrets  of  his  heart."  With 
this  preamble  he  thanked  the  Speaker  for  what  he 
had  said,  and  hoped  still  to  merit  his  praise.     He 

^  Journals  of  the  Lords,  i.  2(59-72. 


424  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

thanked  him  further  for  a  subsidy  voted  by  the 
Commons,  and  for  an  Act  they  had  passed,  placing 
all  chantries,  colleges,  and  hospitals  in  the  kingdom 
at  his  disposal,  which  he  hoped  to  order  for  the 
profit  of  the  commonwealth.  He  would  certainly 
not  allow  the  ministries  of  the  Church  to  decay, 
learning  to  be  diminished,  or  the  poor  to  be  un- 
relieved. But  he  felt  it  necessary  to  utter  some 
words  of  warning  as  follows  : — 
Henry  "  Yct  although  I  with  you,  and  you  with  me,  be 

™ch  ou  ill  t^i^  perfect  love  and  concord,  this  friendly  amity 
charity,  canuot  coutiuuc  cxccpt  both  you,  my  lords  temporal, 
and  you,  my  lords  spiritual,  and  you  my  loving 
subjects,  study  and  take  pain  to  amend  one  thing 
which  surely  is  amiss  and  far  out  of  order,  to  the 
which  I  most  heartily  require  you,  which  is  that 
charity  and  concord  is  not  amongst  you,  but  discord 
and  dissension  beareth  the  rule  in  every  place.  St. 
Paul  esaieth  to  the  Corinthians  in  the  13th  chapter, 
'  Charity  is  gentle,  charity  is  not  envious,  charity  is 
not  proud,'  and  so  forth  in  the  said  chapter.  Behold, 
then,  what  love  and  charity  is  amongst  you  when 
the  one  calleth  the  other  heretic  and  anabaptist,  and 
he  calleth  him  again  papist,  hypocrite,  and  Pharisee. 
Be  these  tokens  of  charity  amongst  you  ?  Are  these 
the  signs  of  fraternal  love  between  you  ?  No,  no,  I 
assure  you  that  this  lack  of  charity  amongst  your- 
selves will  be  the  hindrance  and  assuaging  of  the 
fervent  love  between  us,  as  I  said  before,  except 
this  wound  be  salved  and  clearly  made  whole.  I 
must  needs  judge  the  fault  and  occasion  of  this 
discord  to  be  partly  by  negligence  of  you,  the  fathers 
and  preachers  of  the  spiritualty.  For  if  I  know  a 
man  which  liveth  in  adultery,  I  must  judge  him  a 
lecherous  and  a  carnal  person.  If  I  see  a  man  boast 
and  brag  himself,  I  cannot  but  deem  him  a  proud 
man,  I  see  and  hear  daily  that  you  of  the  Clergy 
preach   one  against  another,   teach   one  contrary  to 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE   PARR  425 

another,  inveigh  one  against  another,  without  charity 
or  discretion.  Some  be  too  stiff  in  their  old  mump- 
simus,^  others  be  too  busy  and  curious  in  their  new 
sumpsimus.  Thus  all  men  almost  be  in  variety  and 
discord,  and  few  or  none  preach  truly  and  sincerely 
the  word  of  God,  according  as  they  ought  to  do. 
Shall  I  now  judge  you  charitable  persons  doing  this  ? 
No,  no.  I  cannot  so  do.  Alas,  how  can  the  poor 
souls  live  in  concord  when  you  preachers  sow  amongst 
them,  in  your  sermons,  debate  and  discord  ?  Of  you 
they  look  for  light,  and  you  bring  them  to  darkness. 
Amend  these  crimes,  I  exhort  you,  and  set  forth 
God's  word,  both  by  true  preaching  and  good  example 
giving,  or  else  I,  whom  God  hath  appointed  his  Vicar 
and  high  minister  here,  will  see  these  divisions  extinct, 
and  these  enormities  corrected  according  to  my  very 
duty,  or  else  I  am  an  unprofitable  servant  and  untrue 
officer." " 

We  may  well  stand  amazed  at  such  a  sermon 
preached  to  his  bishops  and  clergy  by  one  who 
claimed  to  be  God's  vicar  in  his  own  kingdom.  The 
vicar  of  Christ  recognised  by  other  nations  was  at 
Rome ;  but  Henry  had  displaced  him  so  far  as  his 
dominions  went,  and  had  taken  upon  himself  the  full 
responsibilities  of  the  position.  And  he  went  on  to 
rebuke  the  laity  also  for  railing  at  bishops,  and 
speaking  slanderously  of  priests,  against  good  order 
and  Christian  fraternity.  If  they  knew  any  bishop 
or  preacher  to  teach  erroneous  or  perverse  doctrine, 
they  ought  to  inform  some  of  his  Council,  or  himself, 
whose  business  it  was  to  reform  such  matters,  and 
not  be  judges  themselves,  for  in  such  high  causes 
they  might  easily  err.  "And  although  you  be 
permitted  to  read  Holy  Scripture,"  he  added,  "and 
to  have  the  Word  of  God  in  your  mother  tongue, 
you  must  understand  that  it  is  licensed  you  so  to 
do  only  to  inform  your  own  consciences  and  to  instruct 

1  See  p.  399,  ante.  2  Hall's  Chronicle,  pp.  865-6. 


426  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

your  children  and  family,  and  not  to  dispute  and 
make  Scripture  a  railing  and  a  taunting  stock  against 
priests  and  preachers,  as  many  light  persons  do.  I 
am  very  sorry  to  know  and  hear  how  unreverently 
that  most  precious  jewel,  the  Word  of  God,  is  dis- 
puted, rhymed,  sung,  and  jangled  in  every  alehouse 
and  tavern,  contrary  to  the  true  meaning  and  doctrine 
of  the  same.  And  yet  I  am  even  as  much  sorry  that 
the  readers  of  the  same  follow  it  in  doing  so  faintly 
and  coldly ;  for  of  this  I  am  sure  that  charity  was 
never  so  faint  amongst  you,  and  virtuous  and  godly 
living  was  never  less  used,  nor  God  himself,  amongst 
Christians,  was  never  less  reverenced,  honoured,  or 
served."^ 
Moral  From  these  words,   proceeding  as  they  do  from 

ifenty'f  ^^®  veiy  highcst  authority,  it  does  not  seem  that  the 
"Refornia-  Reformation  of  religion,  initiated  by  Henry  VIIL,  had 
*^°""  hitherto  produced  very  satisfactory  fruit.     Virtuous 

and  godly  living  was  never  less  used.  But  as  to 
wrangling  and  jangling,  though  these  are  not  agree- 
able signs  in  matters  sacred,  abuses  call  for  protests, 
and  it  is  not  royal  authority  that  will  always  still 
storms  of  that  sort.  This  freedom  to  read  the  Scrip- 
ture in  English  was  already  beginning  to  produce 
very  remarkable  results  ;  and  a  particularly  interesting 
example  of  its  effects  had  come  to  light  in  the  previous 
month  of  March, 
story  of  A  young  womau,  by  name  Anne  Askew,  who  came 

of  a  good  family  in  Lincolnshire,  had  been  married 
to  one  Thomas  Kyme ;  but  the  marriage,  arranged 
by  her  father  against  her  will,  in  the  harsh  feudal 
style,  proved  naturally  unhappy.  She  was  a  devotee 
of  the  New  School,  and  used  to  read  the  open  Bible 
in  Lincoln  Cathedral.  Her  husband  turned  her  out 
of  doors,  and  she  was  in  London  early  in  this  year, 
1545,  seeking  a  divorce,  as  it  seems."     Here  she  was 

1  Hall,  U.S. 

'^  This  must  have  been  the  time  referred  to  in  Louthe's  nariative  where 
he  says  that  she  "was  lodged  before  her  imprisonment  at  an  house  over 


Anne 
Askew. 


tion. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  427 

appreheneled  as  a  Sacramentaiy,  and  examined  at  Her  first 
Sadlers'  Hall  by  commissioners  under  the  Six  Articles.  ^^^°^>°*- 
Christoplier  Dare,  one  of  the  quest,  asked  her  if  she 
really  believed  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  to  be  the 
very  Body  of  Christ.  She  declined  to  reply  unless 
he  would  answer  first  a  question  proposed  by  herself : 
"  Wherefore  was  St.  Stephen  stoned  ? "  And  her 
examiner  confessed  that  he  could  not  tell.  Then 
she  was  questioned  about  having  said  that  "  God  was 
not  in  temples  made  with  hands";  which  she  justified 
by  pointing  out  the  passages  in  Acts  vii.  and  xvii. 
She  confessed  to  saying  that  she  had  rather  read 
five  lines  in  the  Bible  than  hear  five  masses,  for  the 
one  edified  her  and  the  other  did  not.  But  she 
denied  other  points  imputed  to  her.  She  was  then 
examined  by  a  priest  about  the  Sacrament,  but 
declined  to  answer  as  she  "perceived  him  to  be  a 
papist."  But  when  he  asked  her  whether  she  did 
not  think  that  private  masses  helped  souls  departed, 
she  said  it  was  great  idolatry  to  believe  more  in 
them  than  in  the  death  of  Christ.  She  was  then 
taken  before  the  Lord  Mayor  and  questioned  further.^ 
The  Bishop's  chancellor  reproved  her  "  for  uttering 
the  Scriptures,"  saying  St.  Paul  forbade  women  to 
speak  of  the  Word  of  God.  But  she  understood  St. 
Paul  better,  and  said  he  only  forbade  women  "  to 
speak  in  the  congregation  by  the  way  of  preaching." 
In  the  end  the  Lord  Mayor  committed  her  to  the 
Counter,  refusing  to  take  sureties  for  her ;  and  she 
was  not  allowed  to  see  any  of  her  friends  for  eleven 

against  the  Temple."  What  Louthe  says  of  her  while  she  was  lodged 
opposite  the  Temple  is  interesting:  "And  one  great  papist  of  Wykeham 
College,  then  called  Wadloe,  a  cuvsitor  of  the  Chancery,  hot  in  his  religion 
and  thinking  not  well  of  her  life,  got  himself  lodged  hard  by  her  at  the  next 
house,  for  what  purpose  I  need  not  open  to  the  wise  reader.  But  the  con- 
clusion was  that,  where  he  came  to  speak  evil  of  her,  he  gave  her  the  praise 
to  Mr.  Lionel  Throckmorton  for  the  devoutest  and  godliest  woman  that  ever 
he  knew  ;  '  for,'  said  he,  '  at  midnight  she  beginneth  to  pray,  and  ceaseth  not 
in  many  hours  after,  when  I  and  others  apply  our  sleeji  or  do  worse.' " — 
Nichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation,  p.  40. 

^  Her  own  account  of  her  examination  by  the  Lord  Mayor  is  amplified  by 
Louthe,  and  it  really  seems  to  have  been  rather  painfully  ridiculous. 


428   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

days.  But  Bishop  Bonner  sent  a  priest  to  examine 
her,  to  whom  she  expressed  her  willingness  to  be 
shriven,  if  it  were  by  Dr.  Crome,  Sir  Guilliam,  or 
Huntington,  that  she  might  receive  the  Sacrament 
at  Easter.  At  last,  on  the  23rd  March  (if  the  date 
she  herself  gives  be  not  an  error),  she  received  a  visit 
in  prison  from  her  cousin  Brittayne,  who  afterwards 
went  to  the  Mayor  to  induce  him  to  bail  her.  The 
Mayor  still  refused  without  the  consent  of  a  spiritual 
officer.  So  her  cousin  applied  to  the  Bishop's  chan- 
cellor, and  at  length  to  the  Bishop  himself,  who  sent 
for  her  and,  expressing  much  regret  for  her  trouble, 
showed  an  evident  desire  to  help  her.  After  a 
lengthened  interview  he  drew  up  a  confession  which 
he  hoped  she  would  agree  to  sign,  and  said  she  might 
thank  others  for  the  favour  shown  to  her,  as  she 
came  of  a  worshipful  stock.  Instead  of  simply 
signing  it,  however,  she  wrote  underneath  a  declara- 
tion that  she  believed  all  things  contained  in  the 
faith  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  Bishop  was 
greatly  provoked,  and  turned  away  suddenly  into  his 
chamber ;  but  after  she  had  been  remanded  once 
more  to  prison,  her  friends  succeeded,  by  and  by,  in 
getting  him  to  accept  bail  for  her.^ 

This  is  the  substance  of  her  own  account  of  these, 
her  first  examinations — an  account  which  was  evidently 
quite  honest,  and,  though  it  was  written  a  year  later, 
and  was  only  published  by  Bale  in  Germany  the 
year  after  her  death,  requires  very  little  correction. 
But  one  point  which  seems  to  be  erroneous  is  the 
date,  23rd  March,  given  as  the  day  her  cousin 
Brittayne  visited  her  in  prison,  as  it  is  on  record 
that  Bishop  Bonner  extracted  from  her  on  the  20th  ^ 

;,~  ^  Foxe,  V.  538  -  43.  Cp.  Bale's  account  of  her  in  the  original  publica- 
tion ;  also  Louthe's  Reminiscences  in  T>!'ichols's  Narratives  of  the  Reformation. 
Loathe  speaks  of  this  examination  as  if  it  had  led  to  her  execution,  which  it 
did  not. 

"  If  the  23rd  were  the  true  date  of  Brittayne's  visit  to  her,  then,  according 
to  the  narrative,  the  Bishop  could  not  have  seen  her  and  asked  her  signature 
to  the  confession  before  the  26th;   and  it  is  quite  impossible  that   "the 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  429 

a  real  recantation  or  explanatory  confession  to  save 
her  from  condemnation  on  the  points  of  which  she  was 
accused.  This  confession  cannot  be  such  a  fabrication 
as  Foxe  insinuates ;  moreover,  she  herself  gives  the 
substance  of  it  from  memory.  It  was  witnessed 
not  only  by  Bishop  Bonner  himself,  but  by  another 
bishop  and  eleven  other  persons  named,  others  still 
being  present  in  the  room,  and  Bonner  had  read  it 
over  to  her  before  asking  her  to  sign  it.  He  had 
first  asked  her  if  she  agreed  with  it,  and  her  reply 
was,  "  I  believe  so  much  thereof  as  the  Holy  Scripture 
doth  agree  unto ;  wherefore  I  desire  you  that  ye  will 
add  that  thereunto."  He  replied  that  she  should 
not  teach  him  what  he  should  write.  He  then  "went 
forth  into  his  great  chamber  and  read  the  same  bill 
before  the  audience,"  who,  according  to  her  own 
saying,  "  inveigled  and  willed  her "  to  set  her  hand 
to  it.  But  when  he  placed  it  before  her  to  sign, 
instead  of  a  simple  signature  she  wrote,  "  I,  Anne 
Askew,  do  believe  all  manner  things  contained  in  the 
faith  of  the  Catholic  Church." 

Such,  at  least,  is  her  own  story,  by  which  it  would 
appear  that  she  was  perversely  bent  on  thwarting  the 
Bishop's  benevolent  intentions  towards  herself.  "  So 
much  as  Scripture  doth  agree  to" — "the  faith  of  the 
Catholic  Church  ! "  The  point  for  her  was  to  clear 
herself  of  the  imputation  that  she  had  brought  herself 
under  the  Six  Articles  by  questioning  Transubstantia- 
tion,  and  to  confess  the  change  no  less  real  whether  the 
host  was  consecrated  by  a  good  or  a  bad  priest,  or 
whether  it  was  then  received  or  reserved  in  the  pix. 
The  form  of  words  drawn  up  for  her  by  Bonner  was 
expressly  intended  to  meet  these  points,  and  it  seemed 
that  she  had  really  accepted  the  document,  when  she 

twentieth  "  in  the  record  can  be  an  error  for  "  the  twenty-sixth  "  ;  for  it  is 
added  "in  the  year  .  .  .  after  the  computation  of  the  Church  of  England 
1544."  That  means  the  historic  year  1545,  for,  by  the  computation  of  the 
Churoh  of  England,  the  number  of  the  year  of  our  Lord  changed  only  on 
the  25th  March. 


430  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

wilfully  added  something  of  her  own.  The  Bishop 
"  flung  into  his  chamber  in  a  great  fury."  But  her 
cousin,  Brittayne,  followed  his  lordship  thither  to 
intercede  for  her.  Dr.  Weston  also  tried  to  explain 
away  her  indiscretion,  and  though  she  was  remanded 
to  prison,  sureties  were  finally  put  in  for  her  at  St. 
Paul's.  But  apparently  she  did  at  last  actually  sign 
the  confession  required  of  her,  though  she  may  have 
regretted  it  afterwards,  for  the  document  of  the  20th 
in  Bonner's  register  gives  the  subscription  :  "By  me 
She  is  Anne  Askew,  otherwise  called  Anne  Kime."  Anyway, 
amiigned  gj^^  ^^^  liberated  on  bail;  and  when,  on  the  13th 
acquitted.  Juuc  followiug,  shc  was  arraigned  with  others  at  the 
Guildhall,  she  was  fully  acquitted,  as  no  witnesses 
appeared  against  her.^ 

So  for  the  remainder  of  that  year  she  was  at 
liberty.  But  new  and  more  serious  trouble  awaited 
her  in  1546.  Not  her  only,  however,  for  circum- 
stances had  been  gradually  leading  the  King  to 
consider  how  far  he  could  safely  go  on  with  the  old 
game  of  playing  fast  and  loose  with  heresy,  and 
preaching  charity  on  both  sides.  The  Council  of 
Trent  had  not  only  been  formally  opened  on  the  13th 
December  1545,  but  had  held  its  second  session  on  the 
7th  January  1546.  Even  in  expectation  of  its  opening 
the  King  had  sought  security  against  possible  results, 
first  by  luring  to  his  aid  the  German  Protestants,  who 
had  a  common  interest  with  himself  in  endeavouring 
to  prevent  it,  and  at  the  same  time,  as  he  strongly  sus- 
pected that  their  efforts  at  prevention  would  fail,  by 
binding  the  Emperor  in  a  closer  alliance  with  himself 
than  ever,  so  that  he  could  not  be  practically  affected 
by  the  fiery  darts  of  excommunication.  These  two 
diSerent  and  opposite  lines  of  policy  he  was  carefully 
pursuing  at  once,  quite  ready  at  any  time  to  drop  that 
which  proved  to  be  the  weaker  as  soon  as  it  had  served 
its  purpose.     And  though  it  is  not  my  object  in  this 

'  Foxe,  M.S.;  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  155;  Holiiished,  iii.  968. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  431 

work  to  illuminate  the  crooked  ways  of  diplomacy,  a 
word  or  two  seem  necessary  at  this  particular  juncture, 
that  the  reader  may  take  in  the  situation. 

The  treaty  of  Crepy,  in  1544,  between  Charles  V. 
and  Francis  I.  had  given  the  Pope  very  great  satis- 
faction,   as   making    the   Council    appear   at   last   a 
possibility.     He  had  seriously  admonished  the  Em- 
peror just  before  for  being  in  league  with  a  schismatic 
king,  and  for  endeavouring  to  settle  matters  of  religion 
in  Germany  by  a  Diet  without  reference  to  the  Holy 
See.     And  though  Charles  was  not  driven  to  peace 
by  mere  theoretical  considerations,  he  was  beginning  Religions 
to    feel  that  he  had  gone  quite  far   enough  in  his  '^^fj^j  . 
efforts   to   conciliate   the    Protestants,   and    that   he  diplomacy 
could  not  but  pay  some  deference  to  the  claims  of  ^^'^°^®.*^'*l 

••11-  1-1  1  111-       Council  of 

that  spiritual  authority  which  was  acknowledged  m  Trent. 
all  his  dominions  except  by  some  German  princes. 
Still,  he  could  not  easily  afford  to  break  off  amity 
with  England,  especially  as  there  might  yet  be  a 
doubt  of  the  durability  of  the  new  peace  with  France, 
which,  in  point  of  fact,  lost  one  great  security  for  its 
permanence  by  the  death  of  the  Duke  of  Orleans  in 
September  1545.  Henry,  on  the  other  hand,  had 
been  in  communication  with  the  Protestants,  whom 
he  now  encouraged  to  offer  their  services  to  mediate 
between  England  and  France,  as  these  were  the  only 
powers  to  which  they  could  look  for  help  if  the  Pope 
and  Emperor  were  united  against  them.  Con- 
ferences accordingly  took  place  at  Calais  between 
Lutheran  ambassadors  and  Henry's  astute,  confi- 
dential secretary,  Paget,  who  understood  his  master's 
mind  very  thoroughly  ;  while  Bishop  Gardiner  was  in 
the  Low  Countries,  sent  thither  avowedly  in  the  first 
instance  to  meet  the  French  Admiral,  d'Annebaut, 
with  a  view  to  a  general  pacification.  Gardiner  did 
not  like  the  notion  of  transactions  going  on  with  the 
Protestants,  but  what  was  done  at  Calais  was  care- 
fully concealed  from  him.     The  Protestants  at  Calais 


432   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

were  no  less  jealous  of  what  Gardiner  was  doing  afc 
the  Imperial  Court,  especially  as  he  stayed  long  after 
d'Annebaut  had  left;  but  they,  too,  were  mystified 
with  ingenious  excuses.  By  the  end  of  the  year  it 
appeared  that  Protestant  mediation  was  a  failure,  and 
the  Lutheran  envoys  withdrew,  while  Gardiner, 
following  out  his  instructions,  drew  the  bonds  of 
alliance  closer  betw^een  his  master  and  the  Emperor, 
the  result  being  the  treaty  of  Utrecht,  which  was 
signed  in  January  1546. 

Now,  of  course,  while  the  King  was  pursuing  this 
double  game  abroad,  he  wished  rival  schools  of 
theology  to  keep  the  peace  at  home,  and  it  was  quite 
natural  that  he  should  read  them  a  lecture  upon 
Christian  charity.  But  as  he  became  more  and  more 
hopeful  of  the  Emperor's  friendship,  to  protect  him 
from  the  Pope  and  strengthen  his  hands  against 
France,  he  knew  that  he  must  cast  off  his  Lutheran 
friends,  and  show  himself  more  plainly  opposed  to 
heresy  within  his  own  kingdom.  Francis  L  was  fully 
committed  to  the  Pope's  cause,  and  the  Pope  was 
aiding  him  against  England.  Charles  V.,  though  he 
found  it  his  interest  now,  as  formerly,  to  maintain 
Henry's  friendship,  and  give  even  stronger  securities 
for  it,  was  loyal  to  the  Roman  Pontifi",  and  could  only 
keep  friends  with  England  if  England  showed  some 
respect  for  the  faith  and  practice  of  Christendom. 
And  the  King  soon  found  it  necessary  to  put  some 
restraint  upon  Cranmer's  reforming  zeal  in  Church 
matters,  which  he  had  hitherto,  as  we  have  seen, 
supported  against  all  kinds  of  criticism.  For  just 
at  this  time,  w^hile  Gardiner  was  still  at  Utrecht, 
the  Primate  drew  up  a  letter  for  the  King's  signa- 
ture, to  be  addressed  to  himself,  to  give  efi"ect  to 
a  little  reform  on  which  he  had  apparently  got  the 
Bishops  of  Worcester  and  Chichester  (Nicholas  Heath 
and  George  Day)  to  agree  with  him.  Though 
so  many  superstitions  had  been  abolished,  some  still 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  433 

remained  which  the  progressive  party  desired  to  get 
rid  of.  Bells  were  rung  all  night  on  the  vigil  of  All 
Hallows  (31st  October) ;  images  in  the  churches  were 
covered  during  the  whole  of  Lent ;  the  veil  over  the 
cross  was  lifted  on  Palm  Sunday  and  the  congregation 
knelt  to  it.  Cranmer,  Heath,  and  Day  had  been 
appointed  "  to  peruse  certain  books  of  service,"  and 
as  all  other  vigils  had  been  for  years  abolished,  except 
that  the  name  of  vigils  still  remained,  they  recom- 
mended that  this  should  be  abolished  also.  The  King 
was  further  desired  to  forbid  images  to  be  covered 
henceforth  ;  no  veil  was  to  be  placed  upon  the  cross,  and 
no  kneeling  to  it  was  to  be  allowed  on  Palm  Sunday 
or  any  other  time.  But  the  letter  drawn  up  for  the 
King  went  even  further  than  the  suggestions  of  the 
Primate's  coadjutors.  "  Creeping  to  the  Cross  "  on 
Good  Friday  was  a  greater  abuse  than  any,  for  it  was 
accompanied  by  words  and  directions  for  the  cross  to 
be  "  adored,"  and  this,  by  what  the  bishops  them- 
selves had  set  forth  in  the  book  of  Necessary  Doc- 
trine, was  against  the  Second  Commandment.  So 
this,  too,  must  cease ;  and  Cranmer  was  to  intimate 
the  abrogation  of  these  abuses  to  all  his  suffragans.^ 

This  reform  was  to  have  been  set  on  foot  along 
with  the  long  suspended  project  for  a  revision  of 
ecclesiastical  laws."  Cranmer  himself  felt  it  very 
advisable  that  some  good  reasons  should  be  set  forth 
for  the  alterations,  lest  people  should  think  that  they 
involved  dishonour  to  the  Cross  itself,  or  even  to 
Christ.  Perhaps,  in  conference  with  the  King — for 
they  had  certainly  been  discussing  the  matter 
together  at  Hampton  Court  beforehand^ — he  may 
also  have  found  out  that  there  were  prudential 
reasons  for  keeping  reform  within  some  limits ;  for, 
according  to  Foxe,  the  King  had  already  been  per- 

1  Cranmer's  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  p.  414. 
"  lb.,  p,  415. 

^  This  appears  quite  clearly  both  from  what  Foxe  says,  and  from  Cranmer's 
own  letter  to  the  King. 

VOL.  II  2  F 


434  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.iv 

suaded  to  go  still  further  than  the  Archbishop's 
letters  suggest, — that  it  is,  say,  "  to  pull  down  the 
roods  in  every  church,"  whereas  the  Archbishop's 
letters  clearly  contemplate  that  they  should  remain 
there.  Nevertheless,  even  the  more  moderate  pro- 
gramme had  to  be  set  aside.  Cranmer  sent  the 
letters  for  the  King's  signature  to  the  care  of  Sir 
Anthony  Denny,  but  the  King  made  answer  : — 

Further  I  am  now  otherwise  resolved,  for  you  shall  send  my  lord 

sto°^"ed  for  ^^  Canterbury  word  that,  since  I  spake  with  him  about  these 
politic  matters,  I  have  received  letters  from  my  lord  of  Winchester, 
reasons.  now  being  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea,  about  the  conclusion 
of  a  league  between  us,  the  Emperor,  and  the  French  King, 
and  he  writeth  plainly  unto  us  that  the  league  will  not 
prosper  nor  go  forward  if  we  make  any  other  innovation, 
change  or  alteration,  either  in  religion  or  ceremonies,  than 
heretofore  hath  been  already  commenced  and  done.  Where- 
fore my  lord  of  Canterbury  must  take  patience  herein,  and 
forbear  until  we  may  espy  a  more  apt  and  convenient  time 
for  that  purpose.^ 

"  Superstition  "  and  "  idolatry  "  were  accordingly 
allowed  to  remain  till  a  more  convenient  season  could 
be  found  for  getting  rid  of  them.  A  progressive 
policy  in  Church  matters  might  have  been  useful  if  it 
had  come  to  a  league  with  the  German  Protestants 
against  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor ;  but,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  Protestant  mediation  with  France  had  failed, 
and  Gardiner  had  succeeded  in  securing  the  King's 
position  otherwise,  by  a  treaty  with  the  Emperor. 
England  now  must  be  very  orthodox  that  the 
Emperor  might  not  be  reproached  as  the  ally  of  a 
heretical  sovereign,  and  that  France,  exhausted  by 
the  war,  might  ultimately  feel  she  also  could  make 
peace  with  Henry  without  apparent  sacrifice  of 
Catholic  principles. 

Pious  souls  and  popular  preachers,  however,  could 
not  fully  appreciate  the  reasons  for  moderation  ;  and 

1  Foxe,  V.  362. 


cH.m  KATHARINE  PARR  435 

in  Lent  Dr.  Crome,  preaching  at  the  Mercers'  Chapel, 
founded  an  argument  against  Purgatory  upon  what 
had  just  been  done  in  Parliament.  For  an  Act  had 
been  passed  in  the  last  session  for  the  dissolution  of 
chantries ;  these  foundations  for  the  benefit  of 
departed  souls  were  to  go  the  way  of  the  monas- 
teries. And  it  was  not  only  natural,  but  surely  Dr. 
quite  iustifiable,  in  Dr.  Crome  to  tell  his  audience  ^^'°"^^'^  ^ 

■^    I  .  f.  111  11  '11        sermon  at 

that  II  trentals  and  chantry  masses  could  avail  the  the 
souls  in  Purgatory,  then  did  the  Parliament  not  chTer' 
well  in  giving  away  monasteries,  colleges  and 
chantries  which  served  principally  to  that  purpose. 
But  if  the  Parliament  did  well  (as  no  man  could 
deny)  in  dissolving  them,  and  bestowing  the  same 
upon  the  King,  then  it  is  a  plain  case  that  such 
chantries  and  private  masses  do  nothing  to  confer 
(sic)  and  relieve  them  in  Purgatory."^ 

That  was  very  inconvenient  reasoning,  for  it  could 
not  possibly  be  answered.  Yet  it  was  not  even  new, 
except  that  the  Act  was  new  by  which  he  justified  it, 
for  he  had  said  the  same  thing  years  before.  In 
1539  he  had  been  in  serious  danger  from  the  Act  of 
the  Six  Articles,  but  went  to  the  King  and  entreated 
him  not  to  allow  the  law  to  be  too  severely  adminis- 
tered ;  and  it  was  said  to  have  been  on  his  entreaty 
that  prosecutions  were  stopped  for  a  time.  In  1540, 
just  before  Christmas,  he  had  preached  fervently 
on  the  insufficiency  of  works  and  on  other  sub- 
jects, denouncing  masses  for  the  dead  as  unprofit- 
able, otherwise,  he  said,  the  King  had  done  wrong 
in  putting  down  the  monasteries.  At  this  the  clergy 
took  alarm,  and  Dr.  Wilson  was  urged  to  apply  a 
remedy  by  preaching  of  an  opposite  character,  which 
he  did.  Such  variance  between  preachers,  however,  He  had 
was  not  to  be  endured ;  so  the  King  called  both  of  ordered  to 
them  before  him  in  January  1541,  and  delivered  recant  five 
judgment  that  Crome  should  make  a  recantation  at  before; 

1  Foxe,  V.  537. 


436   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  rv 

Paul's  Cross  in  Lent,  warning  him  that  if  he  were 
accused  again,  the  law  must  take  its  course  against 
him.  He  was  ordered  expressly  to  declare,  in  oppo- 
sition to  what  he  had  said,  that  "  public  and  private 
masses  were  a  profitable  sacrifice,  as  well  for  the 
living  as  the  dead.  And  although  masses  and  other 
prayers  and  helps  profit  the  departed,  yet  the  King's 
Majesty  and  the  Parliament  have  piously  and  justly 
abolished  the  monasteries  in  this  realm."  No  reason, 
however,  was  given  for  this  last  opinion.^ 

How  he  fulfilled  the  mandate  on  that  occasion  is 
further  related  in  the  letter  of  Richard  Hilles  to 
BuUinger,  from  which  the  above  information  ia 
derived : — 

and  read  When  the  Sunday  came  on  which  he  was  to  recant  he 
^^*t^id  pi'sached  a  godly  discourse,  and  at  the  end  of  it  told  the 
to  read,     people  that  he  had  received  a  written  document  from  the 

King's   Majesty  which   he  was   ordered   to  read   to   them. 

And  after  he  had  read  it,  he  committed  the  congregation  to 

God  in  a  short  prayer,  and  so  went  away. 

He  had  not  altered  his  own  doctrine  apparently, 
nor  said  that  he  had  altered  it,  but  simply  read  what 
he  was  told  to  read ;  but  all  that  was  done  to  him  in 
consequence  was  an  order  not  to  preach  any  more. 
However  dissatisfied  the  clergy  may  have  been,  the 
King  apparently  was  not  much  offended  at  the 
evasion,  and  probably  did  not  care  even  to  shut 
permanently  the  mouth  of  a  popular  preacher  who 
might  yet  be  useful  to  him.  So  now,  five  years 
later,  Crome  was  bold  enough  to  repeat  the  offence, 
hoping  that  the  Act  against  chantries  might  serve  as 
his  justification. 

His  sermon  at  the  Mercers'  Chapel  had  been 
delivered  on  Passion  Sunday,  the  11th  April. ^     On 

^  Original  Letters  (Parker  Soc),  pp.  211-15. 

^  The  Grey  Friars'  Chronicle  (Camden  Soc),  p.  50,  says  it  was  preached 
"in  his  parish  church,"  which  would  be  that  of  St.  Mary  Aldermary ;  and 
further,  that  "he  preached  against  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar."  If  so,  tlie 
case  was  still  more  serious. 


cH.ni  KATHARINE   PARR  437 

the  20tli  he  was  called  to  account,  and  this  tmie 
compelled  to  put  his  signature  to  certain  articles, 
with  a  view  to  a  public  recantation,-^  so  that  there 
should  be  no  new  evasion.  This  recantation  he 
was  enjoined  to  make  at  Paul's  Cross  on  the  9th 
May,  the  second  Sunday  after  Easter ;  but  again 
he  complied  in  a  way  that  did  not  give  satisfaction. 
Bishops  Bonner  and  Heath,  with  Richard  Coxe  (the 
Prince's  tutor),  the  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  and  other 
notable  divines  were  present  to  hear  him,  but 
reported  unfavourably  of  his  sermon  next  day,  when 
he  was  called  before  the  Council.  What  had  he  said 
this  time  ? 

A  report  of  the  sermon  exists  which  seems  to  con-  His  sermon 
tain  all  the  important  points  in  it.  He  took  for  his  cro^g'^^'^ 
text  John  x.  11,  "I  am  a  good  Shepherd"  (as  it  was 
translated  in  Coverdale's  Bible,  though  the  Greek 
original  has  distinctly  the  definite  article),^  and  after 
enlarging  on  the  opposite  qualities  of  the  good 
Shepherd  and  the  hireling,  he  gave  thanks  to  God 
for  having  laid  aside  many  strange  voices.  "  For 
my  sheep,  saith  Christ,  hear  my  voice,  and  the  voice 
of  a  stranger  they  know  not."  Then  he  declared  the 
Bishop  of  Rome's  usurped  power  to  be  a  strange 
voice, — his  pardons,  pilgrimages,  purgatory,  Peter- 
pence,  feigned  religious  foundations  of  monasteries 
and  chantries,  to  be  strange  voices.  "And  in  this 
uttering,"  said  he,  "  I  have  found  my  brethren  the 
priests  wondrously  offended  with  me,  and  that  for 
two  causes.  One  was,  they  say,  because  I  speak 
against  their  living ;  the  other  cause  is  for  because  I 
have  spoken  of  late  much  against  the  Bishop  of 
Rome,  calling  him  beggar,  occasioned  to  do  so  by  the 

^  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  167. 

2  In  Matthew's  Bible  (1537)  and  in  Cranniei's  (1540)  the  definite  article 
was  rightly  used  here,  as  it  had  been,  before  then,  very  naturally,  by 
Tyndale  who  translated  from  the  Greek.  Yet,  strange  to  say,  not  only  the 
Zurich  Bible  of  Froschover  but  even  Luther  uses  the  indefinite:  "  Ich  bin 
ein  guter  Hirte."  And  Coverdale,  who  had  only  the  Latin  and  the  German 
translations  before  him,  followed  the  latter  here  in  their  error. 


438   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Gospel  that  then  I  was  in  hand  with,  which  is  the 
eighteenth  chapter  of  St.  Luke.  To  the  first  thus  I 
answer  :  I,  for  my  part,  would  have  my  brethren  to 
have  a  living,  even  as  I  would  myself  to  have  a 
living ;  but  that  they  should  have  it  after  the  truth, 
as  God's  word  appointed  it  to  them.  Now  to  the 
second,  saith  he,  thus  I  answered :  the  Bishop  of 
Kome  begging  by  his  primacy,  pardons,  purgatory, 
Peter-pence,  pilgrimages,  feigned  religion,  founda- 
tion of  minsters  and  chantries,  is  a  bold,  valiant, 
sturdy  beggar.  "Well,  the  beggar  is  now  gone,  said 
he.  Yea,  the  King's  Majesty,  with  his  High  Court 
of  Parliament,  have  taken  this  beggar  by  the  head, 
and  hurled  him  quite  out  of  the  realm  like  an  idle 
beggar.  But  alack,  this  bold  beggar's  staff  hath  this 
beggar  of  Rome  left  here  behind  him;  which  staff 
beateth  both  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men.  Now, 
sayeth  he,  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  that  bold  bragging 
beggar,  being  thus  cast  out,  laud  be  it  to  God  and  our 
Prince,  his  staff  would  I  wish  to  be  cast  out  with 
him.  Yea,  I  would  wish  himself  to  have  it  in  his 
own  hand,  for  many  poor  men  are  daily  beaten  with 
it,  and  I  myself  have  been  beaten  with  it ;  for,  as  I 
understand,  men  of  worship  appointed  thereunto  of 
late  have  preached  in  their  sermons,  have  beaten  me 
with  the  staff  of  the  beggar,  and  that  even  for  saying 
that  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  doth  not  take  nor  put 
away  sin.  But  I  put  it  to  your  judgment  to  judge 
what  would  they  [say]  if  they  durst,  to  our  Sovereign 
Lord  the  King,  considering  that  he  indeed  doth  alter 
their  fond  foundations  and  put  them  to  other  use, 
considering  the  error  therein.  That  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  hath  the  conditions  of  an  angry  beggar  we  may 
prove  it  thus.  The  angry  beggar  threateneth,  curseth 
and  fighteth.  The  Bishop  of  Rome  threateneth  first 
with  interdiction  all  such  as  will  not  obey  his  froward 
will.  Second,  he  curseth  with  excommunication  all 
such  as  aid  or  counsel  those  which  regard  not  his 


cH.m  KATHARINE   PARR  439 

interdiction,  as  the  chronicles  of  England  and  of  other 
countries  maketh  mention.  Thirdly,  he  fighteth  by 
setting  princes  together  by  the  ears  against  him 
which  (i.e.  the  one  who)  regardeth  not  his  interdic- 
tion and  great  curse,  promising  great  indulgence  for 
they  (sic)  defending  of  Holy  Church." 

All  this  would  have  been  fully  approved  of  in 
previous  years,  ever  since  the  breach  with  Rome,  but 
indulgence  in  such  invectives  was  not  politic  now. 
The  real  offence,  however,  was  in  what  followed  : — 

"  Then  turned  he  to  the  text  again,  desiring  all 
men  to  pray  to  the  Good  Shepherd,  and  according  to 
the  custom  prayed.  The  prayers  done,  he  stood  up 
and  said  these  words  : — '  Worshipful  audience,  I  came 
not  hither  to  recant,  nor  God  willing,  I  will  not  He  refuses 
recant.  Yet  notwithstanding,  divers  and  many  have  *°  ''®*^*"* ' 
sent  letters  abroad  informing  their  friends  that  I 
should  recant,  to  the  great  slander  of  God's  word, 
and  of  me,  being  a  poor  preacher  of  the  same  admitted 
within  this  realm  of  England.  But  as  for  me  I  care 
not ;  but  yet  would  I  wish  them  that  they  would 
send  half  so  many  letters  informing  their  friends  that 
I  have  not  recanted.  Well,  God  forgive  them  !  And 
yet,  will  they  nill  they,  I  will  pray  for  them,  will 
them  good,  and  wish  them  good,'  etc.  And  then  he 
showed  them  that  in  a  sermon  made  at  the  Mercers' 
Chapel  on  Passion  Sunday,  upon  the  ninth  chapter  to 
the  Hebrews,  he  declared  with  the  text  that  Christ 
our  High  Shepherd,  entering  into  the  Holy  Place, 
once  for  all,  not  with  strange  blood  but  with  his  own 
precious  blood,  hath  found  plentiful  and  eternal  re- 
demption. Upon  the  which  occasion,  said  he,  I  said, 
and  say  again,  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  hath  wrongly 
applied  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  making  it  a  satis- 
faction for  sins  of  the  quick  and  dead,  as  he  hath  done 
the  blood  of  martyrs  oftentimes.  And  then  he  showed 
that  to  call  it  a  sacrifice  he  would  not  stick,  for  a 
sacrifice  it  is  of  thanksgiving  to  our  only  Shepherd 


440  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

for  his  once  oflfered  offering,  which  hath  made  a  full 
satisfaction  of  all  the  sins  of  them  which  believe  and 
cleave  to  him  by  faith.  Yea,  it  is  Eucharistia,  which 
is  to  say  sacrificium  laudis.  Yea,  and  it  is  to 
us  a  commemoration  of  Christ's  death  and  Passion, 
according  to  his  own  words.  Hoc  facite  in  meam 
commemorationem,  etc.'' ^ 
and  is  The  Council  examined  Crome  "  upon  his  rashness 

before  the  ^^^  indirect  proceedings."  -  In  vain  did  he  lay  his 
Council,  hand  upon  his  breast  and  protest  that  he  sincerely 
thought  that  he  had  done  everything  required  of 
him.  Coxe  particularly  related  not  only  the  sub- 
stance of  the  discourse  but  the  manner  in  which  it 
was  delivered,  accusing  Crome  personally  of  having 
deluded  him,  for  he  had  done  his  best  to  intercede 
with  the  King  in  his  favour.  Crome  was  also  re- 
minded how  he  had  been  warned  by  Dean  Haynes  of 
Exeter  to  beware  of  yielding  to  the  "  fantasies "  of 
his  brethren  in  London,  and  particularly  not  to  use 
such  an  expression  as  "  that  he  came  not  to  recant."  ^ 
The  Council  went  back  to  his  sermon  on  Palm 
Sunday,  about  which  they  set  him  to  answer  inter- 
rogatories in  a  chamber  by  himself.  They  also  got 
from  him  the  names  of  a  number  of  persons  who  were 
friendly  to  him ;  but  what  to  do  with  them  was 
evidently  a  matter  for  serious  consideration,  for  some 
of  them  were  by  no  means  insignificant.'*  "  Foras- 
much as  upon  Crome's  answers,"  they  wrote  next  day 
to  Mr.  Secretary  Petre,  "  we  see  plainly  that  sundry 
persons,  of  divers  qualities,  have  otherwise  used  them- 

^  Harleian  MS.  425  f.  65.  The  document  is  headed  (in  a  different  hand 
from  the  text):  "Certain  notes  of  a  sermon  made  at  Paul's  Cross  by  Dr. 
Crome  on  Sunday  the  9th  day  of  May  in  the  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Henry  VIII.  the  xxxiii."  This  would  be  the  year  1541,  and  it  is  noticed  in 
that  year  accordingly  in  L.  P.,  xvi.  814.  But  the  9th  May  was  a  Monday, 
not  a  Sunday,  in  1541,  and  it  is  clear  the  year  of  the  reign  should  have  been 
"xxxviii.,"  not  "xxxiii." 

^  Dasent,  i.  414. 

'  Cp.  State  Papers,  i.  843  ;  and  Grey  Friars'  Chronicle,  51. 

*  Those  implicated  are  said  to  have  been  "as  well  of  the  Court  as  of  the 
city." — Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  167. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  441 

selves  with  the  said  Mr.  Crome  than  in  our  opinion  is  who  had 
tolerable ;  we  be  more  desirous  to  know  the  King's  J^^°^'"''s^<^ 
Majesty's  pleasure  how  we  shall  use  the  calling  and 
ordering  of  them,  as  a  matter  wherein  we  would  be 
loth  to  offend  in  doing  too  much  or  too  little,  but  as 
may  be  agreeable  with  the  King's  Majesty's  pleasure  ; 
whereof  we  require  you  we  may  by  you  be  advertised 
as  soon  as  ye  can,  with  sending  again  also  the  deposi- 
tions  and   examinations,   which   we   now  send   unto 

"  1 
you. 

From  his  answer,  it  appeared  among  others  that 
he  had  been  "  comforted  " — that  is,  encouraged — by 
one  Lascelles,  whom  they  had  already  in  examination, 
because  he  had  "  boasted  abroad  that  he  was  desirous 
to  be  called  to  the  Council,  and  he  would  answer  to 
the  prick."  Next  day,  the  11th  May,  a  physician 
named  Dr.  Hewick  (or  Huick)^  was  brought  before 
them,  who  was  on  bad  terms  with  his  wife,  and  an 
information  was  received  from  Tenterden  about  "a 
marvellous,  abominable  and  seditious  sermon "  made 
there  on  Wednesday  after  Easter ;  on  which  they  sent 
at  once  to  apprehend  the  preacher.^ 

On  the  13th  they  wrote  again  to  Mr.  Secretary 
Petre  : — 

This  day  we  look  for  Latimer,  the  vicar  of  St.  Bride's,  and 
some  others  of  those  that  have  specially  comforted  Crome  in 
his  folly. 

Crome,  sithens  the  last  depositions  sent  to  his  Majesty 
hath  confessed  that  Huick,  upon  the  sight  of  the  articles 
which  he  should  have  set  forth  at  Paul's  Cross,  showed  him- 
self to  mislike  the  same,  and  thought  they  could  not  he 
maintained  with  good  conscience,  and  that  he  doubted  not, 
therefore,  but  the  said  Crome  could  declare  them  honestly ; 
by  the  which,  and  such  other  things  as  Crome  hath  con- 
fessed, it  appeareth  that  he  and  some  of  those  folks  that  he 


^  State  Papers,  i.  843,  844  ;  Dasent's  Acts  of  Privy  Council,  i.  414. 

'  Not  Robert  Huick,  Principal  of  St.  Alban's  Hall,  Oxford,  as  biograpliers 
liave  supposed.  From  his  signature  (Dasent's  Acts  of  Privy  Council,  i.  433) 
his  Christian  name  was  "  William."  ^  State  Papers,  i.  844. 


442   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

named  in  his  depositions,  be  as  much  to  be  blamed,  or  more, 
than  himself.^ 

Together  with  this  letter  the  Council  forwarded  to 
Petre  "  a  lewd  bill "  sent  them  by  the  Lord  Mayor, 
which  had  been  set  up  on  a  church  door  in  London, 
against  one  of  those  who  had  deposed  against  Crome. 
They  had  also  received,  both  from  the  Lord  Mayor 
and  from  the  Chief  Baron  of  the  Exchequer,  "  other 
lewd  books  and  writings,  with  knowledge  of  some 
other  light  persons  which  meddle  further  in  these 
matters  than  their  capacities  be  able  to  comprehend."  ^ 

The  Council  at  this  time  was  sitting  habitually  at 
Greenwich,  while  the  King  was  at  Westminster.  Mr. 
Secretary  Petre  at  Westminster  wrote  to  them  the 
same  day,  conveying  the  King's  thanks  for  their 
proceedings  about  Crome,  whom  they  still  kept  in 
custody,  and  whom  he  desired  them  to  press  still 
further  by  the  following  message  : — 

The  King's  Majesty,  considering  that  Crome,  in  this  his 
last  submission,  affirmeth  again  the  former  articles,  willeth 
that  your  lordships  shall  cause  one  book  to  be  made  of  the 
articles  sent  hither  now  by  my  lord  of  Worcester,  and  of 
those  which  were  last  agreed  upon  to  be  set  forth  by  him ; 
and  the  same  being  joined  together,  his  Majesty  would  have 
him  put  his  hand  to  the  same,  to  be  sent  to  his  Highness.^ 

Latimer  That  samc  13th  May  the  Council  had  before  them 

examined.  £qj.  examination  good,  honest  Hugh  Latimer,  who  had 
been  living  in  obscurity  during  all  the  seven  years 
since  he  gave  up  his  bishopric  in  1539.  During  the 
first  twelvemonth  he  had  been  committed  to  the 
custody  of  Bishop  Sampson,  and  when  released  he 
had  been  ordered  to  remove  from  London,  and  to 
forbear  from  preaching  and  from  visiting  either  of  the 
universities  or  his  own  old  diocese  of  Worcester.*  No 
doubt  he  obeyed,  but  where  he  had  spent  his  time 
since  then  we  do  not  know.     Perhaps  the  order  had 

1  state  Papers,  i.  846.  2  jj,  3  75^  p,  347, 

■*  Original  Letters  (Parker  Soc. ),  p.  215. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  443 

been  afterwards  relaxed  in  his  case  as  in  Crome's ; 
for  lie  was  now  accused  of  having  "  devised  and 
counselled  with  Crome  touching  his  last  sermon, 
wherein  he  satisfied  not  his  promise  to  the  King's 
Majesty."  This  seems  to  imply  that  Latimer  was 
now  resident  in  or  near  London,  and  the  fact  that 
Crome  had  taken  counsel  with  him  was  all  the  more 
natural  because  Crome's  argument  against  purgatory 
from  the  abolition  of  the  chantries,  was  one  that 
Latimer  himself  had  used  to  the  King  on  the  sup- 
pression of  the  smaller  monasteries.^  In  reply  to 
the  Council  he  now  said  that  he  had  indeed  been  often 
in  Crome's  company  since  he  was  in  Lord  Chancellor 
Wriothesley's  custody,  "  and  that  he  had  said  some- 
what touching  his  recanting  or  not  recanting ;  couch- 
ing his  words  so "  —  this  was  the  Privy  Council's 
report  next  day — "  as  he  neither  confessed  the  matter, 
nor  yet  uttered  his  mind  so  cleanly,  but  somewhat 
stack  and  appeared  by  the  way.  Whereupon  we 
ministered  an  oath  unto  him,  and  delivered  him 
certain  interrogatories  to  answer,  appointing  him  a 
place  for  the  quiet  doing  of  the  same."  But  after 
answering  two  or  three  of  these,  he  sent  to  them  to 
say  that  he  could  proceed  no  further  till  he  had  leave 
to  speak  with  them  again.  As  the  Council  were  busy 
with  the  examination  of  Hewick  and  Lascelles,  of  Dr. 
John  Taylor  (or  Cardmaker),  vicar  of  St.  Bride's,  and 
of  a  Scottish  friar,  they  deputed  Bishop  Tunstall  and 
Sir  John  Gage,  Controller  of  the  Household,  to  confer 
with  him  ;  but  he  insisted  that  he  must  address  him- 
self to  the  whole  Council,  and  they  put  aside  other 
matters  to  hear  him.  We  may  continue  in  the  words 
of  their  report : — 

At  his  coming  he  told  us  he  was  light  to  swear  to  answer 
the  interrogatories  before  he  had  considered  them,  and  that 

1  "The  founding  of  monasteries  argueth  Purgatory  to  be.  So  the  putting 
of  them  down  argueth  it  not  to  be." — Latimer's  Remains,  p.  249  (Parker 
Society). 


444  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

charity  would  that  some  man  should  have  put  him  in  remem- 
brance of  it.  He  told  us  it  was  dangerous  to  answer  to  such 
interrogatories,  for  that  he  might  by  that  mean  be  brought 
into  danger ;  noting  the  proceeding  therein  to  be  more  ex- 
treme than  should  be  ministered  unto  him  if  he  lived  under 
the  Turk  as  he  liveth  under  the  King's  Majesty ;  for  that  he 
said  it  was  sore  to  answer  for  another  man's  fact,  and  besides, 
he  said  he  doubted  whether  it  were  his  Highness's  pleasure 
that  he  should  be  thus  called  and  examined ;  desiring  there- 
fore to  speak  with  his  Majesty  himself  before  he  made  further 
answer ;  for  he  was  once,  he  said,  deceived  that  way  when  he 
left  his  bishopric,  being  borne  in  hand  (i.e.  persuaded)  by 
the  lord  Cromwell  that  it  was  his  Majesty's  pleasure  he 
should  resign  it,  which  his  Majesty  after  denied,  and  pitied 
his  condition.  And  finally  he  said,  he  thought  there  were 
some  that  had  procured  this  against  him  for  malice. 

He  mentioned  specially  Gardiner,  the  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  whose  ill-will  to  him  he  inferred  partly 
from  some  words  they  had  in  the  King's  presence  at 
Westminster,  and  partly  from  what  Gardiner  had 
once  written  to  Cromwell  against  the  very  arrogant 
sermon  that  he  had  preached  to  Convocation  in  1536. 
Gardiner  replied  that  he  did  him  much  wrong,  show- 
ing that  he  had  always  "  loved,  favoured,  and  done 
for  his  person,"  and  that  he  had  no  cause  to  complain 
of  the  fact  that  he  was  not  satisfied  with  his  doctrine. 
Latimer  could  say  nothing  in  reply,  and  had  to  go  on 
answering  his  interrogatories.^ 

The   same   day   Dr.    Hewick   and   his   wife   both 

appeared  before  the  Council,  and  the  grounds  of  their 

differences  were  examined ;  which  we  may  pass  over. 

They  found  that  the  wife  had  been  unjustly  accused, 

although  shameful  artifices  had  been  used  to  entice  her 

to  misconduct.^ 

Some  They  next  examined  Lascelles,   the  vicar  of  St. 

examined  ^ridc's,  and  the  Scot.     Lascelles,  like  Latimer,  wished 

also.         not  to  commit  himself     He  would  not  make  answer 

about  his  conference  with  Crome  so  far  as  it  touched 

1  state  Papers,  i.  848-9.  2  /^^^  350  .  Dasent,  i.  417. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR 


445 


matter  of  Scripture,  unless  he  had  the  King's  express 
commandment  and  protection,  giving  as  his  reason 
that  it  was  neither  wisdom  nor  equity  that  he  should 
kill  himself.  "  Thus,"  wrote  the  Council,  "  you  see 
his  Highness  must  pardon  before  he  know  if  Mr. 
Lascelles  may  have  his  will.  The  vicar  of  St.  Bride's 
showeth  himself  to  be  of  the  same  sort,  but  yet  not 
so  bold  as  the  rest.  And  as  to  the  Scot,  he  is  more 
meet  for  Dunbar  than  for  London ;  for  neither  hath 
he  any  manner  of  wit  or  learning  meet  for  a  preacher, 
but  is  a  very  ignorant  (sic),  and  hath  framed  his 
sayings  after  his  audience,  as,  to  be  rid,  he  will  say 
now  what  you  will  bid  him."  ^ 

Next  day,  the  15th,  a  yeoman  of  the  chamber  was 
despatched  to  summon  Dr.  Shaxton  (the  late  Bishop 
of  Salisbury,  who  resigned  his  bishopric  at  the  same 
time  as  Latimer)  and  one  William  Morres  to  answer 
about  "  these  matters  of  Crome."  On  the  16th,  orders 
were  sent  for  three  out  of  five  persons,  convicted 
under  the  Act  of  the  Six  Articles,  to  be  executed  at 
Colchester  and  two  other  places  in  Essex.  On  the 
17th,  Dr.  Hewick  and  some  other  persons  were 
committed  to  the  Tower  for  having  dissuaded  Crome 
from  fulfilling  his  promise  "  in  the  declaration  of  the 
articles."  The  priest  of  Tenterden,  who  had  now  been 
brought  up,  was  committed  to  Newgate,  and  Crome's 
servant  was  sent  to  prison  for  giving  evasive  answers. 
The  examination  of  the  Tenterden  priest,  however, 
only  began  next  day,  when  he  was  again  committed 
for  further  examination  about  his  assertion  "  that  in 
the  hallowing  of  holy  bread  and  holy  water  there  was 
heresy."  ^ 

On  the  23rd  one  Powley,  who  had  been  with  Dr. 
Crome  just  before  his  sermon,  and  had  been  ordered 
not  to  depart  from  London  without  licence,  was  dis- 
charged by  the  Council  "  upon  submission  and  a  good 
lesson,"  as  his  master,  the  Earl  of  Arundel,  wished 

1  state  Papers,  i.  850.  2  Dasent,  i.  417-21. 


446  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

to  send  him  into  Sussex  on  business.  On  the  24th 
two  yeomen  of  the  chamber  were  sent  to  apprehend 
Sir  Robert  Wisdom,  the  priest  of  whom  we  heard 
not  long  ago/  and  to  summon  "  one  Kyme  and  his 
wife  "  (of  whom  we  have  heard  also)  to  appear  before 
the  Council  within  ten  days  after  receipt  of  the 
message.^  Wisdom,  as  we  have  seen,  was  Dr.  Crome's 
curate,  and  Kyme  was  the  husband  of  Anne  Askew. 

So  here  was  another  unhappy  couple  whose 
differences  were  to  be  examined  by  the  Council, 
and  both  appeared  before  them  on  the  19th  June, 
as  shown  by  the  Privy  Council  record.  In  the 
interval  the  Council  had  been  less  occupied  with 
cases  of  heresy ;  they  had  released  Dr.  Hewick  on 
bail  on  the  29th  May,  and  also  one  Robert  Crome 
— a  near  relation,  doubtless,  of  the  preacher — on  the 
Anne  Ist  Juuc.^  But  Anuc  Askcw's  case  required  special 
Askew      attention.      She   and   Kyme   beinoj   both   before   the 

oGior6  tn.6 

Council.  Council  she  was  asked  why  she  would  not  acknow- 
ledge him  as  her  husband,  and  said  my  Lord  Chancellor 
knew  her  mind  on  that  matter.  They  told  her  it 
was  the  King's  pleasure  that  she  should  explain  it 
to  them ;  but  she  declined,  saying,  however,  that  if 
the  King  were  willing  to  give  her  a  hearing  she 
would  explain  it  to  him.  They  said  it  was  not 
meet  that  the  King  should  be  troubled  about  her, 
and  she  replied  that  Solomon,  the  wisest  of  kings, 
had  deigned  to  hear  two  poor  women.  Kyme,  on 
this,  was  allowed  to  return  to  the  country  till  he 
should  be  again  sent  for ;  and  a  conversation  followed 
between  Anne  and  the  Council,  "  wherein,"  as  they 
placed  on  record,  "  she  showed  herself  to  be  of  a 
naughty  opinion."  So,  judging  her  to  be  quite 
unreasonable,  they  sent  her  to  Newgate,  "  to  remain 
there  to  answer  to  the  law."  They  also  sent  thither 
one  White,  "  who  attempted  to  make  an  erroneous 
book,"  and  who,  when  they  argued  with  him,  "  showed 

1  See  pp.  379,  380.  ^  Dasent,  423-4.  ^  /^.^  i_  433^  440. 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  447 

himself  of  a  wrong  opinion  concerning  the  Blessed 
Sacrament."  ^ 

Anne  Askew's  own  account  of  her  examination  by 
the  Council  is  a  pretty  full  one.  It  was  printed  by 
Bale  next  year — at  Marburg,  the  edition  is  dated. 
But  probably  the  date  is  fictitious,  and  the  examina- 
tion itself,  as  there  published,  was  declared  by  Bishop 
Gardiner  to  be  "  utterly  misreported."  ^  We  have, 
however,  unfortunately,  no  other  report  to  go  by,  Her  own 
and  must  give  a  brief  account  of  it  as  it  stands  in  f;Ccount  of 
Bale's  publication.  After  refusing  to  answer  about  amination. 
*'  Master  Kyme,"  as  she  called  him,  she  was  asked 
by  the  Lord  Chancellor  what  she  thought  about  the 
Sacrament.  She  replied :  "  I  believe  that  so  oft  as 
I,  in  a  Christian  congregation,  do  receive  the  bread 
in  remembrance  of  Christ's  death,  and  with  thanks- 
giving, according  to  His  holy  institution,  I  receive 
therewith  the  fruits  also  of  His  most  glorious  Passion." 
Bishop  Gardiner  desired  her  to  make  a  direct  answer, 
and  she  said,  "  I  will  not  sing  a  new  song  of  the  Lord 
in  a  strange  land."  The  Bishop  replied  that  she  spoke 
parables,  and  she  told  him  it  was  best  for  him ;  "for 
if  I  show  the  open  truth,"  she  said,  "  ye  will  not 
accept  it."  This  was  scarcely  a  modest  answer  to 
a  bishop ;  but  Gardiner  knew  the  ways  of  the  new 
school,  and  said  that  she  was  a  parrot.  She  replied 
that  she  was  ready  to  suffer  all  things  at  his  hands, 
not  only  rebukes,  but  all  that  might  follow,  and  that 
gladly.  She  then  received  "  divers  rebukes  "  from  the 
Council,  but  was  always  ready  with  an  answer  and 
carried  on  the  debate  with  them  for  about  five  hours ; 
after  which  the  clerk  of  the  Council  took  her  to  my 
lady  Garnish.^     It  would  thus  seem  that  the  Council's 

1  Dasent,  i.  462.  White's  Christian  name  was  Nicholas,  according  to 
Wriotliesley  (C'hron.  i.  167)  ;  but  according  to  the  Grey  Friars'  Chronicle 
(p.  51),  he  was  Christopher  White  of  the  Inner  Temple. 

•-  Foxe,  vi.  31. 

•'  lb.,  V.  544.  Although  this  account  of  her  examination,  written  by 
herself,  was  published  by  Bale  (interlarded  with  comments)  in  1548,  it  is 
more  convenient  to  refer  to  it  in  Foxe. 


448  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

order  to  send  her  to  Newgate  was  not  acted  on  that 
very  day. 

She  was,  indeed,  brought  before  them  again  on 
the  day  following  (though  no  sitting  of  the  20th  is 
recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the  Council),  and  asked  again 
what  she  said  about  the  Sacrament.  She  replied  that 
she  had  said  already  all  she  could  say.  After  a  while 
they  bade  her  stand  aside.  Then,  on  consulting  to- 
gether, they  deputed  Lord  Lisle  (Dudley,  who  became 
Duke  of  Northumberland  in  the  following  reign),  the 
Earl  of  Essex  (William  Parr,  the  Queen's  brother),  and 
Bishop  Gardiner  to  go  and  speak  to  her ;  and  they 
all  urged  her  strongly  to  "  confess  the  Sacrament  to 
be  flesh,  blood,  and  bone."  She  told  Lord  Parr  and 
Lord  Lisle  "  that  it  was  a  great  shame  for  them  to 
counsel  contrary  to  their  knowledge."  She  evidently 
considered  that  they  believed  no  more  than  she  did. 
Bishop  Gardiner  tried  another  way  with  her,  and  said  he 
wished  to  speak  with  her  familiarly.  "  So  did  Judas," 
she  replied,  "when  he  unfriendly  betrayed  Christ." 
The  Bishop,  taking  no  notice  of  the  afiront,  desired 
to  speak  with  her  alone.  But  this  she  refused,  and 
when  he  asked  why,  she  answered,  "  that  in  the  mouth 
of  two  or  three  witnesses  every  matter  should  stand,^ 
after  Christ's  and  Paul's  doctrine."  ^ 

The  Lord  Chancellor,  who  seems  to  have  come  in 
and  joined  the  conference,  again  began  to  examine  her 
about  the  Sacramenb,  and  she  asked  him  in  return, 
"  how  long  he  would  halt  on  both  sides  ?  "  He  inquired 
where  she  found  that,  and  she  told  him,  in  the 
Scripture.  The  Lord  Chancellor  took  his  departure. 
Gardiner  then  very  seriously  warned  her  that  she  was 
in  danger  of  the  stake.  "  I  answered,"  she  writes, 
"  that  I  had  searched  all  the  Scriptures,  yet  could  I 
never  find  that  either  Christ  or  His  apostles  put  any 
creature  to  death.  '  Well,  well,'  said  I,  '  God  will 
laugh  your  threatenings  to  scorn.' "     She  was  then 

1  Foxe,  V.  544. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  449 

told  to  stand  aside.  Then  two  notable  divines,  Dr. 
Cox  and  Dr.  Robinson,  came  to  her,  but  their  exhorta- 
tions were  equally  ineffectual.  They  had  drawn  up 
"  a  bill  of  the  Sacrament,"  but  she  would  not  sign 
it.  On  Sunday,  which  must  have  been  the  20th, 
she  was  very  ill,  expecting  to  die,  and  desired  to 
speak  with  Latimer ;  but,  of  course,  this  was  not 
allowed,  as  Latimer  himself  was  under  a  cloud.  And 
it  was  that  same  day,  when  she  was  in  great  pain, 
that  she  was  sent  to  Newgate.^ 

All  well-meant  efforts  had  failed  to  shake  her 
constancy.  Friends  might  have  hoped  otherwise ; 
for  the  days  had  long  gone  by  when  abjuration 
could  not  save  the  victim  of  the  Six  Articles ;  and 
the  Act,  as  we  have  seen,  had  few  terrors  now, 
even  for  those  who  despised  the  doctrine  that  it 
was  meant  to  protect.  But  it  was  no  longer  a 
time  when  the  King  could  allow  it  to  become  com- 
pletely a  dead  letter,  and  that  the  King  himself  felt 
some  anxiety  about  this  case  there  is  good  reason 
to  believe.  The  Council  had  left  her  "  to  answer  to 
the  law,"  and  her  case  was  now  to  come  on.  She 
was  arraigned  at  the  Guildhall^  along  with  Shaxton,  she  and 
the  late  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  the  Mr.  White  above  ^ntencTd 
referred  to,  and  John  Hadlam  of  Essex,  tailor,  for  at  the 
maintaining  heretical  views  on  the  Sacrament ;  and 
as  they  all  confessed  their  heresies,  no  jury  was 
required  to  convict  them.  So  the  awful  sentence 
was  pronounced  by  the  "  quest."     She  wrote  a  con- 

^  Foxe,  U.S.  544-5. 

-  The  date  given  in  Wriothesley's  Chronicle  is  tlie  18th  June  ;  but  this  is 
impossible  as  she  was  only  before  the  Council  on  the  19th,  and  Hadlam  was 
only  examined  by  them  on  the  22nd  and  23id,  and  committed  to  Newgate  on 
the  latter  day.  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  moreover,  mentions  the  trial  at 
the  Guildhall,  which  he  dates  the  18th,  after  Dr.  Crome's  recantation  sermon 
at  Paul's  Cross,  which  he  dates  the  27th.  The  18th,  however,  is  certainly 
an  error  for  the  28th,  as  will  be  seen  by  a  contemporary  letter  printed  by 
Ellis  {Original  Letters,  2nd  series,  ii.  172-8),  dated  London,  2nd  July  1540, 
which  first  speaks  of  Dr.  Crome's  recantation  sermon  as  delivered  "on 
Sunday  last"  {i.e.  the  27th  June),  and  then  of  the  trial  of  Shaxton,  Anne 
Askew,  and  the  others  "on  Monday  following."  See  Appendix  to  this 
Chapter. 

VOL.   II  2  G 


Guildhall. 


450  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

fession  of  her  faith  in  Newgate  before  her  condemna- 
tion ;  and  after  it  she  wrote  a  more  brief  one,  which 
she  enclosed  in  a  letter  to  the  Lord  Chancellor,  desiring 
him  to  submit  it  to  the  King.  In  the  former  she 
expressly  declares  the  bread  to  be  only  a  sign ;  in 
the  latter  she  declares  that  she  shall  die  innocent, 
for  she  abhorred  all  heresies.  "  And  as  concerning 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord,"  she  adds,  "  I  believe  so 
much  as  Christ  hath  said  therein,  which  He  confirmed 
with  His  most  blessed  blood.  I  believe  also  so  much 
as  He  willed  me  to  follow  and  believe,  and  so  much 
as  the  Catholic  Church  of  Him  doth  teach ;  for  I 
will  not  forsake  the  commandment  of  His  holy 
lips." ' 

The  prospect  of  a  fiery  death  was  bad  enough,  but 
worse  trials  awaited  her.  Bhaxton  and  White,  who 
were  condemned  along  with  her,  were  induced  next 
day  "  by  the  good  exhortation  and  doctrine  of  the 
bishops  of  London  and  Worcester "  (Bonner  and 
Heath)  "and  divers  other  doctors"  to  renounce 
their  heresy  and  agree  to  the  established  view  of 
the  Sacrament.  There  seems  no  doubt,  moreover, 
that  their  conversion  was  sincere ;  at  least,  Shaxton, 
we  know,  remained  steadfast  from  this  time  to  the 
end  of  his  life  in  the  hitherto  received  doctrine  of 
the  Church,  and  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose 
that  both  were  convinced  by  men  of  superior  learning. 
Great  efforts  were  also  made  to  persuade  Anne,  which 
are  recorded  by  herself  as  follows.  "  On  Tuesday," 
she  says  (this  must  be  the  29  th  June,  the  day  after 
her  sentence) : — 

On  Tuesday  I  was  sent  from  Newgate  to  the  Sign  of  the 
Crown,  where  Master  Rich  ^  and  the  Bishop  of  London  with 
all  their  power  and  flattering  words  went  about  to  persuade 

^  Foxe,  U.S.  545-6. 

^  Sir  Richard  Rich,  Chancellor  of  the  Augmentations,  once  Solicitor- 
General,  whom  Sir  Thomas  More  accused  to  his  face  of  perjury.  See  Vol.  i. 
pp.  493-4. 


CH.III  KATHARINE  PARR  451 

me  from  God ;  but  I  did  not  esteem  their  glosing  pretences. 
Then  came  there  to  me  Nicholas  Shaxton  and  counselled 
me  to  recant  as  he  had  done.  I  said  to  him  that  it  had 
been  good  for  him  never  to  have  been  born;  with  many- 
other  like  words.  Then  Master  Rich  sent  me  to  the  Tower, 
where  I  remained  till  three  o'clock.^ 


It  may  throw  some  light  on  what  follows  if  we  Later 

traditi 
about  her. 


here  take  account  of  traditions  recorded  about  sixty  ^'■'^•ii*^^'^"^ 


years  after  Anne  Askew's  death.  On  the  authority 
of  her  own  nephew  we  learn  that  great  search  had 
been  made  for  her  before  she  was  brought  before 
the  Council ;  and  this  seems  to  be  borne  out  by  the 
fact  that  by  that  time  nearly  four  weeks  had  elapsed 
since  a  message  had  been  sent  out,  requiring  her 
appearance  there  within  ten  days  after  its  receipt. 
So,  no  doubt,  she  concealed  herself  for  some  time. 
Moreover,  we  are  told  by  her  nephew  that  her  dis- 
covery was  effected  by  a  letter  of  her  own  being 
intercepted.^  Then  another  authority,  the  Jesuit 
Parsons,  writing  a  few  years  before  her  nephew,  says 
that  the  King  was  informed  "  that  contrary  to  her 
oaths  and  protestations  she  did  in  secret  seek  to 
corrupt  divers  people,  but  especially  women,  with 
whom  she  had  conversed ;  and  that  she  had  found 
means  to  enter  with  the  principal  of  the  land,  namely 
with  Queen  Katharine  Parr  herself,  and  with  his 
nieces,  the  daughters  of  the  Duke  of  Suffolk,  and 
others."  ^  It  would  thus  appear  that  she  had  been 
sending  furtive  epistles  from  her  hiding-place  into 
the  Court  itself,  where  she  had  some  reason  to  believe 
that  her  scriptural  teaching  would  not  be  altogether 
discouraged,  at  least  by  the  Queen.  This  was  truly 
alarming  at  a  time  when  orthodoxy  was  of  so  much 
political  importance  !  Now  let  us  resume  Anne's  own 
narrative  where  we  left  off : — 

1  Foxe,  U.S.  547. 

*  A  Historie  contayning  the  n-arres,  etc.,  by  Edward  Ascu  (1607),  p.  308. 

'  A  Treatise  of  Three  Conversions  of  Uwjland,  ii.  493. 


452   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

She  will  Then  came  Master  Rich  and  one  of  the  Council/  charging 

uot  iiu-       me  upon  my  obedience  to  show  unto  them  if  I  knew  any 

phcate  any  ^^^^^  ^^  woman  of  my  sect.     My  answer  was  that  I  knew 

persons.       none.     Then  they  asked  me  of  my  lady  of  Suffolk,  my  lady 

of  Sussex,  my  lady  of  Hertford,  my  lady  Denny,  and  my  lady 

Fitz  William.     To  whom  I  answered,  if  I  should  pronounce 

anything  against  them,  that  I  were  not  able  to  prove  it. 

Then  said  they  unto  me,  that  the  King  was  informed  that 

I  could  name  if  I  would,  a  great  number  of  my  sect.     I 

answered  that  the  King  was  as  well  deceived  in  that  behalf 

as  dissembled  with  in  other  matters. 

The  reader  will  not  require  much  information  about 
the  ladies  mentioned  in  this  extract ;  but  he  may, 
perhaps,  desire  to  be  told  about  the  first,  "  my  lady 
of  Suffolk,"  that  she  was  the  widow  of  Henry  VIII.'s 
favourite,  Charles  Brandon,  Duke  of  Suffolk.  She 
was  the  daughter  and  heiress  of  the  last  Lord 
Willoughby  of  Eresby — a  lively  and  quick-witted 
lady  enough,  to  judge  by  her  letters.     To  continue  : — • 

Then  commanded  they  me  to  show  how  I  was  maintained 
in  the  Counter,  and  who  willed  me  to  stick  to  my  opinion.  I 
said  that  there  was  no  creature  tliat  therein  did  strengthen 
me ;  and  as  for  the  help  that  I  had  in  the  Counter,  it  was  by 
means  of  my  maid.  For  as  she  went  abroad  in  the  streets 
she  made  moan  to  the  prentices,  and  they,  by  her,  did  send 
me  money ;  but  who  they  were  I  never  knew. 

Then  they  said  that  there  were  divers  gentlewomen  that 
gave  me  money ;  but  I  knew  not  their  names.  Then  they 
said  that  there  were  divers  ladies  that  had  sent  me  money. 
I  answered  that  there  was  a  man  in  a  blue  coat  who  delivered 
me  ten  shillings,  and  said  that  my  lady  of  Hertford  sent  it 
me ;  and  another  in  a  violet  coat  gave  me  eight  shillings,  and 
said  my  lady  Denny  sent  it  me.  Whether  it  were  true  or  no 
I  cannot  tell,  for  I  am  not  sure  who  sent  it  me,  but  as  the 
maid  did  say.  Then  they  said,  there  were  of  the  Council 
that  did  maintain  me ;  and  I  said  no. 

And  now  comes  the  mosfc  dreadful  part  of  the 
story : — 

1  A  marginal  note  in  some  early  editions  of  Foxe  (though  not  in  the  first 
edition  of  1563)  says  that  "  this  councillor  was  Sir  John  Baker." 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  453 

Then  they  did  put  me  on  the  rack  because  I  confessed  no  she  is 
ladies  or  gentlewomen  to  be  of  my  opinion,  and  thereon  they  racked, 
kept  me  a  long  time ;  and  because  I  lay  still  and  did  not  cry, 
my  lord  Chancellor  and  Master  Rich  took  pains  to  rack  me 
with  their  own  hands,  till  I  was  nigh  dead. 

Then  the  lieutenant  caused  me  to  be  loosed  from  the  rack. 
Incontinently  I  swooned,  and  then  they  recovered  me  again. 
After  that  I  sat  two  long  hours  reasoning  with  my  lord 
Chancellor  upon  the  bare  floor;  where  he,  with  many 
flattering  words,  persuaded  me  to  leave  my  opinion.  But  my 
Lord  God  (I  thank  his  everlasting  goodness)  gave  me  grace 
to  persevere,  and  will  do,  I  hope,  to  the  very  end. 

Then  was  I  brought  to  a  house,  and  laid  in  a  bed,  with  as 
weary  and  painful  bones  as  ever  had  patient  Job ;  I  thank 
my  God  therefor.  Then  my  lord  Chancellor  sent  me  word, 
if  I  would  leave  my  opinion,  I  should  want  nothing;  if  I 
would  not,  I  should  forthwith  to  Newgate,  and  so  be  burned. 
I  sent  him  again  word  that  I  would  rather  die  than  break  my 
faith.i 

I  cannot  suppose  that  Lord  Chancellor  Wriothesley, 
or  even  such  a  degraded  creature  as  Sir  Richard  Rich, 
loved  the  barbarous  work  to  which  they  were  com- 
mitted. This,  indeed,  is  what  Foxe  wishes  us  to 
believe,  but  we  may  well  expect  him  to  make  the 
worst  of  it.  The  rack  was  never  used,  except  by 
high  authority,  to  extract  information,  and  in  this 
case  it  was  applied  to  a  poor  woman  already  con- 
demned to  death.  The  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower, 
Sir  Anthony  Knyvet,  in  the  first  instance  ordered 
its  application,  and  evidently  with  some  degree  of 
mildness,  so  that  she  did  not  cry  out.  But  no  in- 
formation was  extracted,  and  the  Lord  Chancellor 
and  Rich,  "throwing  off  their  gowns" — a  detail 
supplied  by  Foxe, — administered  the  torture  them- 
selves. They  first  asked,  however,  if  she  were  with 
child,  hoping,  no  doubt,  to  have  some  pretext  for 
not  executing  their  full  commission.  "  Ye  shall  not 
need  to  spare  for  that,"  she  said,  "  but  do  your  wills 
upon  me."      So  the  brutal  work  was  done,  and  the 

'  Foxe,  V.  547. 


454  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Chancellor  and  Ricli  took  their  way  to  Court.  But  the 
Lieutenant,  meanwhile,  taking  boat,  had  arrived  there 
before  them,  and  getting  access  to  the  King,  related 
what  had  occurred,  asking  pardon  because  he  had 
declined  to  use  severity  himself  without  his  express 
commands.  On  this,  we  are  informed,  the  King 
"  seemed  not  very  well  to  like  of  their  so  extreme 
handling  of  the  woman,  and  also  granted  the  lieu- 
tenant his  pardon."  ^  We  are  not  told  that  the  King 
was  really  indignant  at  his  officials  having  exceeded 
their  instructions. 

At  last,  on  the  16th  July,  the  tragedy  was  com- 
she  is  pleted.  Anne  Askew  was  burned  in  Smithfield  ;  and 
wltb"'*^  along  with  her  suffered  John  Lascelles,  a  priest  named 
others.  Hclmslcy,^  who  had  been  an  Observant  friar  of  Rich- 
mond, and  John  Hadlam,  the  tailor  of  Colchester. 
The  spectacle  was  witnessed  by  a  crowd  of  people,  in 
the  midst  of  which  a  circular  area  was  kept  clear  by 
barriers.  Within  this  the  victims  were  bound,  each 
to  a  stake,  a  store  of  faggots  was  kept  to  feed  the 
fire,  and  a  pulpit  was  erected,  as  usual  on  such 
occasions,  for  a  preacher.  The  sermon  was  delivered 
by  Shaxton,  the  late  bishop,  who,  with  two  other 
persons,  was  pardoned  after  sentence  for  the  same 
offence  for  which  the  victims  suffered.  Above  the 
crowd,  on  a  raised  scaffolding  in  front  of  St. 
Bartholomew's  Hospital,  were  the  Lord  Chancellor, 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  and  most  of  the  Lords  of  the 
Council,  with  the  Lord  Mayor,  aldermen,  and 
sheriffs.^ 

The  King,  as  Parsons  understood  the  matter,  had 

^  Foxe,  V.  547-8. 

'^  "John  Hemley,"  according  to  Wriothesley  ;  but  the  Grey  Friars' 
Chronicle  gives  the  surname  as  "  Hemmysley,"  the  Christian  name  being 
apparently  illegible  in  the  MS.  Hall,  on  the  other  hand,  calls  him  Nicholas 
Otterden  ;  and  Foxe,  Nicholas  Belenian.  Perhaps  his  Christian  name  is 
wrongly  given  by  Wriothesley,  though  he  gives  it  twice  as  John  ;  but  more 
probably  he  was  one  of  those  heretics  who  changed  their  names,  both  Christian 
and  surnames,  when  they  found  it  advisable,  to  avoid  being  tracked. 

2  Wriothesley's  Chrmiide,  i.  169,  170 ;  Grey  Friars'  Chronicle,  p.  51. 
There  is  a  woodcut  of  the  scene  in  the  old  editions  of  Foxe. 


CH.  in  KATHARINE  PARR  455 

authorised  the  racking  of  Anne  Askew,  to  ascertain 
how  far  the  ladies  in  the  Court,  including  the  Queen 
herself,  had  countenanced  heretical  utterances  ;  and  it 
was  at  this  time  that  Katharine  Parr  for  a  moment  stood 
in  real  danger.  The  story  is  given  with  some  detail 
by  Foxe,  and  I  will  endeavour  to  condense  it  here  as 
much  as  possible  from  what  Foxe  himself  says,  for  he 
is  the  only  authority  through  whom  it  has  reached 
us,  and,  notwithstanding  his  bias  (for  which  it  is  not 
difficult  to  make  allowance),  no  doubt  it  is  true  at 
least  in  substance.  Of  course  in  Foxe's  estimation 
Gardiner,  the  one  strong  adherent  of  old  principles, 
was  at  the  bottom  of  this,  as  of  all  other  mischief. 

Katharine  Parr  had  conversed  pretty  freely  with  Queen 
others  for  some  time  on  matters  of  reliction,  and  the  ^^athanne 

o         '  X  arr  in 

King,  since  his  return  from  Boulogne  in  1544,  had  danger. 
been  well  aware  that  she  "  was  very  much  given  to 
the  reading  and  study  of  Holy  Scriptures."  Daily  in 
Lent  for  the  space  of  an  hour  one  of  her  chaplains 
had  "  made  some  collation "  to  her  and  her  ladies, 
often  discoursing  on  "such  abuses  as  in  the  Church 
then  were  rife."  The  King  himself  "  at  first  and  for 
a  great  time  "  seemed  to  like  this  very  well,  and  at 
length  she  ventured  to  urge  him  to  a  more  perfect 
reformation  of  abuses  and  superstitions.  But  the 
enemies  of  "  the  Gospel "  conspired  against  her, 
especially  Gardiner  and  Lord  Chancellor  Wriothesley  ; 
and  as  the  King,  now  getting  near  his  end,  was 
fretful,  and  disliked  being  contradicted  in  argument, 
an  opportunity  at  length  arose.  Chafing  under 
physical  suffering,  one  day,  as  she  spoke  about  reli- 
gion, he  suddenly  broke  off  and  changed  the  conver- 
sation. At  the  end  of  their  interview  he  bade  her 
farewell  "  with  gentle  words  and  loving  countenance." 
But  after  she  had  left  he  broke  out  in  the  presence 
of  the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  who  had  heard  their 
conversation  :  "A  good  hearing  it  is  when  women 
become  such  clerks,  and  a  thing  much  to  my  comfort 


456  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

to  come  in  mine  old  days  to  be  taught  by  my  wife  !  " 
Needless  to  say,  the  Bishop  was  ready  enough  to  blow 
the  coals.  He  "seemed  to  mislike  that  the  Queen 
should  so  much  forget  herself"  as  to  argue  with  His 
Majesty,  whom  he  extolled  to  his  face  "  for  his  rare 
virtues,  and  especially  for  his  learned  judgment  in 
matters  of  religion,"  beyond  that  even  of  professed 
doctors,  till  his  discourse  at  length  turned  on  the 
danger  of  a  prince  suffering  "  such  insolent  words  at 
his  subjects'  hands."  He  even  went  on  to  insinuate 
that  the  Queen's  views  tended  to  the  destruction  of 
government,  leading  to  a  belief  in  the  community  of 
goods  ;  and  though  he  durst  not  speak  his  knowledge 
without  assurance  of  the  King's  protection,  yet  he  and 
other  faithful  councillors  could  within  short  time 
"  disclose  such  treasons,  cloaked  with  this  cloak  of 
heresy,  that  his  Majesty  should  easily  perceive  how 
perilous  a  matter  it  is  to  cherish  a  serpent  within  his 
own  bosom." 

These  audacious  insinuations  had  their  effect  upon 
the  King,  who,  "  to  see  belike  what  they  would  do," 
authorised  Gardiner  and  his  friends  to  consult  together 
and  draw  up  articles  against  the  Queen,  assuring  them 
that  he  would  not  spare  her  if  they  had  any  "  colour 
of  law  "  to  countenance  their  charges.  But  first  of  all 
they  proposed  to  accuse,  under  the  Act  of  the  Six 
Her  ladies.  Articles,  some  of  the  ladies  who  were  intimate  with 
her,  especially  her  sister  Lady  Herbert,  afterwards 
Countess  of  Pembroke,  the  Lady  Lane,  her  cousin, 
and  the  Lady  Tyrwit,  who,  like  Lady  Lane,  was  of 
her  privy  chamber.  When  these  ladies  were  appre- 
hended their  coffers  were  to  be  searched  (the  usual 
process  after  important  arrests),  when  it  was  expected 
something  would  be  found  in  their  papers  which 
would  implicate  the  Queen  herself,  and  justify  her 
being  arrested  and  conveyed  to  the  Tower  by  night. 
This  plan,  it  seems,  had  the  King's  own  approval, 
"  who  (belike  to  prove  the  bishop's  malice  how  far  it 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  457 

would  presume)  like  a  wise  politic  prince,  was  con- 
tented dissemblingly  to  give  his  consent  and  to  allow 
of  every  circumstance." 

We  really  must  pause  after  quoting  words  like 
these  to  admire — not  merely  the  social  morality  of 
Henry  VHI.  in  countenancing  a  plot  against  his  own 
wife  (for  of  Henry  VIII. ,  of  course,  we  can  credit 
anything),  but  the  commendation  that  the  plan 
receives  from  an  earnest  votary  of  the  new  religion  in 
the  sixteenth  century.  The  King,  it  is  true,  was 
acting  a  double  part.  He  dissembled,  in  Foxe's 
opinion,  when  he  gave  his  consent  to  a  secret  investi- 
gation of  his  wife's  conduct  in  religious  matters ;  he 
dissembled,  and  was  not  indignant,  when  he  was  told 
that  she  might  turn  out  to  be  a  serpent  in  his  bosom. 
But  such  dissembling  only  showed  him  to  be  "  a  wise 
and  politic  prince."  Whoever  else  is  to  be  blamed, 
you  will  never  find  a  true  gospeller  like  Foxe  ex- 
pressing any  kind  of  reprobation  of  Henry  VIII.'s 
moral  conduct.  He  may  at  the  utmost  deplore  that 
the  King  was  misled  by  evil  counsel  to  persecute 
good  men.  That  a  despot  who  had  no  superior  on 
earth  to  control  him  should  dissemble  and  cabal  against 
his  own  wife,  listening  to  secret  accusations  which  he 
might  at  once  have  repressed  and  punished  if  they 
were  unjust  —  this  was  only  high  and  princely 
policy.  But  that  a  bishop  of  the  old  school  should 
seek  every  occasion,  under  a  most  oppressive  tyranny, 
to  maintain,  as  far  as  possible,  old  principles  of 
religion  as  he  understood  them,  against  high  and  low 
alike,  was  to  Foxe  unpardonable  malice  and  wicked- 
ness. It  is  well  to  bear  this  in  mind  when  we  read 
Foxe's  moral  estimates  of  men.  Whether  they  be 
men  of  his  own  school,  or  those  of  an  opposite  school, 
his  expressed  opinion  of  them  is  never  to  be  trusted. 

I  quote  again ;  for  though  I  condense  as  much 
as  possible,  an  exact  statement  of  facts  is  im- 
portant : — 


458  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

The  King  at  that  time  lay  at  Whitehall,  and  used  very 
seldom,  being  not  well  at  ease,  to  stir  out  of  his  chamber  or 
privy  gallery ;  and  few  of  his  Council,  but  by  special  com- 
mandment, resorted  unto  him, — those  only  except  who,  by 
reason  of  this  practice,  used  oftener  than  ordinary  to  repair 
unto  him.  This  purpose  so  finely  was  handled  that  it  grew 
now  within  few  days  of  the  time  appointed  for  the  execution 
of  the  matter,  and  the  poor  Queen  neither  knew  nor  suspected 
anything  at  all,  and  therefore  used,  after  her  accustomed 
manner,  when  she  came  to  visit  the  King,  still  to  deal  with 
him  touching  religion  as  before  she  did. 

The  King  allowed  her  to  go  on,  "  not  out  of  any 
evil  mind  or  misliking  (ye  must  conceive)  to  have  her 
speedy  despatch,  but  rather,  closely  dissembling  with 
them,  to  try  out  the  uttermost  of  Winchester's 
fetches."  As  the  critical  time  drew  near,  "  it 
chanced  "  (a  very  curious  accident,  surely,  in  such  a 
deep  dissembler) : — 

that  the  King,  of  himself,  upon  a  certain  night  after  her 
being  with  him,  and  her  leave  taken  of  him,  in  misliking  her 
religion,  brake  the  whole  practice  unto  one  of  his  physicians, 
either  Dr.  Wendy  or  else  Owen,  but  rather  Wendy,  as  is 
supposed;  pretending  unto  him  as  though  he  intended  not 
any  longer  to  be  troubled  with  such  a  doctress  as  she  was ; 
and  also  declaring  what  trouble  was  in  working  against  her 
by  certain  of  her  enemies ;  but  yet  charging  him  withal,  upon 
peril  of  his  life,  not  to  utter  it  to  any  creature  living ;  and 
thereupon  declared  unto  him  the  parties  above  named,  with 
all  circumstances,  and  when  and  what  the  final  resolution  of 
the  matter  should  be. 

Unknown  to  the  Queen  things  advanced  so  far 
that  articles  were  not  only  drawn  against  her,  but 
were  actually  signed  by  the  King's  own  hand  — 
although  this,  too,  was  done  "  dissemblingly,  you 
must  understand."  But  the  document,  having  been 
dropped  by  one  of  the  councillors,  was  picked  up  by 
"  some  godly  person,"  who  took  it  at  once  to  the 
Queen.  Naturally,  the  poor  lady  was  terrified  and  in 
a  great  agony  of  apprehension,  "  bewailing  and  taking 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  459 

on  in  such  sort  as  was  lamentable  to  see,  as  certain  of 
her  ladies  and  gentlemen,  being  yet  alive,  who  were 
then  present  about  her,  can  testify."  By  these  words 
Foxe  gives  such  assurance  of  the  truth  of  this  inci- 
dent that  we  cannot  doubt  the  fact.  We  may, 
indeed,  doubt  whether  the  King  really  dissembled,  as 
Foxe  intimates,  in  putting  his  hand  to  the  bill,  or 
whether,  during  the  whole  business,  it  was  with 
Gardiner  or  with  his  wife  that  he  dissembled  chiefly. 
But  dissemble  he  certainly  did  in  a  manner  singularly 
heartless.  Hearing,  however,  that  alarm  had  made 
her  seriously  ill,  he  sent  his  physicians  to  her,  and 
Wendy,  who  knew  well  enough  what  was  the  matter, 
was  able  to  give  her  some  comfort  to  quiet  her  appre- 
hensions ;  advising  her,  however,  to  show  herself  very 
submissive  and  conform  herself  to  the  King's  mind. 
On  this  advice  she  acted,  and,  telling  her  ladies  to  put 
away  all  their  contraband  heretical  books,  she  sought 
the  King's  chamber. 

She  found  him  in  converse  with  certain  gentle- 
men of  the  Chamber,  but  he  at  once  broke  off 
his  talk  with  them  to  salute  her,  and  began  speak- 
ing with  her  about  religion,  propounding  certain 
doubts  on  which  he  wished  to  know  her  opinion. 
Her  reply  is  given  as  a  set  speech  in  which  she  How  she 
expressed  herself  at  some  length,  wondering  how  a  J^f  Khfg. 
King  of  such  great  gifts  should  ask  counsel  of  woman's 
inferior  nature;  and  when  the  King  said  she  had 
become  a  great  doctor,  better  fitted  to  teach  him  than 
to  be  taught  by  him,  she  answered  that  that  was  not 
her  feeling ;  for  though  she  had  made  bold,  with  his 
leave,  to  maintain  some  opinions  to  him,  it  was  only 
to  minister  talk,  partly  hoping  that  it  might  soothe 
his  pain,  and  partly  that  it  might  elicit  some  learned 
discourse  from  him  by  which  she  might  profit. 

"  And  is  it  even  so,  sweetheart  ?  "  said  the  King  ; 
"  and  tended  your  arguments  to  no  worse  end  ?  Then 
perfect  friends  we  are  now  again  as  ever  at  any  time 


46o  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

heretofore."  He  embraced  and  kissed  her,  and  said 
her  words  were  more  welcome  than  a  present  of  a 
hundred  thousand  pounds. 

Next  day,  in  the  afternoon,  he  and  the  Queen 
being  in  the  garden  with  the  above  three  ladies, 
the  Lord  Chancellor  made  his  appearance  with 
forty  of  the  guard  at  his  heels,  intending  to  appre- 
hend both  her  and  the  ladies  instead  of  taking 
the  ladies  first,  according  to  the  original  plan. 
The  King,  however,  called  the  Chancellor  aside,  and 
some  subdued  conversation  took  place,  the  Chan- 
cellor being  upon  his  knees.  What  was  said  the 
Queen  and  ladies  could  not  hear,  except  that  the  King 
replied  to  him  with  the  words,  "Knave!  Beast! 
Fool ! "  and  bade  him  depart  out  of  the  presence. 
This  gave  the  Queen  occasion,  after  he  was  gone,  to 
express  a  hope  that  she  might  intercede  for  the  Lord 
Chancellor,  who  seemed  to  be  in  her  husband's  dis- 
pleasure ;  and  the  King  answered,  "  Ah,  poor  soul ! 
thou  little  knowest  how  evil  he  hath  deserved  this 
grace  at  thy  hands."  ^ 

It  is  a  strange  story  altogether,  and  Foxe  himself, 
gathering  it  up  from  hearsay,  seems  not  to  have 
known  how  to  make  it  into  a  harmonious  whole.  He 
is  inconsistent  in  his  theory  of  the  King's  dissimula- 
tion, at  one  time  suggesting  that  he  never  really 
intended  the  Queen's  arrest,  but  ultimately  that  he 
quite  laid  aside  his  purpose.  Strange  as  it  is,  however, 
we  cannot  say  that  what  is  known  of  Henry  VIH.'s 
personal  history  makes  it  at  all  inconceivable,"  and  we 

'  The  whole  of  the  above  will  be  found  in  Foxe  (v.  553-61,  in  Townsend's 
edition)  under  the  heading,  "  The  Story  of  Queen  Katharine  Parr." 

^  As  early  as  February  this  year  the  Imperial  ambassador  wrote  that  there 
were  rumours  in  London  of  a  new  Queen,  though  he  could  not  find  out  why. 
Some  thought  that  Katharine  would  be  divorced  for  her  sterility  ;  others  said 
there  would  be  no  change  while  the  war  lasted.  The  Duchess  of  Suffolk  was 
talked  about  (she  would  scarcely  have  been  less  Protestant  than  Katliarine). 
But  the  King  showed  no  change  of  his  demeanour  towards  his  existing  Queen, 
though  she  was  annoyed,  even  then,  at  the  reports  about  her  (Spanish 
Calendar,  viii.  p,  318).  Reports  were  cui-rent  also  in  the  beginning  of  April  as 
to  some  impending  change  "with  regard  to  the  feminine  sex "  {Ik,  p.  373). 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  461 

have  seen  already  that  Foxe  vouches  for  its  truth  by 
the  evidence  of  witnesses  living  when  he  wrote. 
Moreover,  Parsons,  the  Jesuit,  in  his  comments  on 
Foxe,  accepts  it  all  as  true,  except  that  he  maintains 
the  Queen  was  saved,  not  by  her  submission  and 
renewed  favour  in  the  King's  eyes,  but  by  the  King's 
mortal  illness  and  death  ;  for  the  date,  as  he  infers 
from  Foxe,  was  the  very  last  year  of  the  King's  reign. ^ 
Here,  however,  I  think  Parsons  is  mistaken,  and  Foxe 
is  right,  for  the  King  lived  some  months  longer,  and 
during  that  interval  we  find  rather  less  evidence  than 
before  of  the  King's  zeal  against  heresy.  No  doubt 
the  tragedy  at  Smithfield  was  a  very  effective  warning. 
On  the  27th  June,  the  day  before  the  trial  of  Anne 
Askew,  Dr.  Crome  at  last  made  an  effective  recanta- 
tion in  a  sermon  at  Paul's  Cross ;  ^  and  on  the  7th  or 
8th  July  proclamation  was  made  in  London,  "  with  a 
trumpet  and  an  herald  at  arms,"  of  a  number  of 
English  heretical  books,  chief  of  which  were  Tyndale's 
and  Coverdale's  translations  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  the  works  of  Frith,  Tyndale,  Wyclifie,  and  a 
number  of  others  named,  any  copies  of  which  were  to 
be  brought  in  by  the  last  day  of  August,  and  delivered 
up  to  the  Lord  Mayor  or  the  Bishop  to  be  burned.^ 

^  Parsons's  Three  Conversions,  ii.  491-2.  Foxe's  dating,  indeed,  is  very 
loose;  for  though  he  places  the  story  after  the  martyrdom  of  Anne  Askew 
and  her  fellow-sutfeiers,  and  of  one  Rogers,  who  suffered  ' '  about  the  same 
time"  in  Smithfield,  he  begins  it  with  the  words,  ''About  the  time  above 
noted,  which  was  about  the  year  after  the  King  returned  from  Boulogne." 
Now,  Henry  VIII.  both  went  to  and  returned  from  Boulogne  in  1544,  and 
the  year  after  would  be  1545.  Still,  he  has  a  preliminary  remark  that  "  after 
these  stormy  stories  [of  Anne  Askew,  etc.],  the  course  and  order,  as  well  of 
the  time  as  the  matter,"  required  him  to  speak  of  the  Katharine  Parr  incident, 
which  in  that  case  must  belong  to  the  year  1546. 

2  "And  the  27th  day  of  June,  which  was  the  Sunday  after  Corpus  Christi 
day,  he  was  commanded  to  preach  at  Paul's  Cross  again,  and  there  recanted 
and  denied  his  words."     {Grey  Friars^  Chronicle,  p.  51.) 

^  Wriothesley's  Chronicle,  i.  168-9  ;  Foxe,  v.  565.  The  date  of  the  proclama- 
tion is  7th  July  in  the  former  authority,  in  the  latter  the  8th.  The  list  of 
prohibited  books  given  after  it  in  Foxe  (pp.  566-8)  seems  not  to  be  of 
Henry  VIII. 's  time,  as  Foxe  at  first  supposed,  but  of  Mary's,  and  that,  no 
doubt,  is  the  reason  why  it  was  suppressed  by  Foxe  himself  after  his  first 
edition,  though  it  has  been  replaced  in  the  modern  edition  of  Townsend  and 
Cattley. 


462   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Indeed,  it  seems  that  more  victims  might  very  well 
have  been  burned  about  that  time  besides  Anne  Askew 
and  her  three  fellow-sufferers  but  for  special  favour ; 
Sir  George  for  Sir  Gcorgc  Blagge,  one  of  the  Privy  Chamber,  had 
ScS/  &^^  himself  into  trouble  by  loose  talk  about  the 
Sacrament.  According  to  Foxe  he  was  falsely  accused 
on  one  point,  when  he  was  sent  for  by  Lord  Chancellor 
Wriothesley  on  the  Sunday  before  Anne  suffered;  then 
next  day  he  was  carried  to  Newgate,  and  thence  to 
Guildhall,  where  he  was  condemned  the  same  day,  and 
was  to  have  been  burned  on  the  Wednesday  following. 
This  would  have  been  apparently  two  days  before 
Anne's  execution,  which  took  place  on  a  Friday.  For 
though  it  would  seem  the  words  imputed  to  him  could 
not  be  proved,  he  was  questioned  about  Dr.  Crome's 
sermon,  at  which  he  was  present,  and  admitted  that 
the  preacher  had  said  that  the  mass  profited  neither 
the  quick  nor  the  dead.  What  was  it  good  for,  then  ? 
"  Belike,"  said  Blagge,  "  for  a  gentleman,  when  he 
rideth  a  hunting,  to  keep  his  horse  from  stumbling." 
But  when  the  news  of  his  condemnation  reached  the 
Court, 

the  King  being  sore  offended  with  their  doings,  that  they 
would  come  so  near  him,  and  even  into  his  Privy  Chamber, 
without  his  knowledge,  sent  for  Wriothesley,  commanding 
eftsoons  to  draw  out  his  pardon  himself,  and  so  he  was  set  at 
liberty ;  who  coming  to  the  King's  presence,  "  Ah,  my  pig  ! " 
saith  the  King  to  him  (for  so  he  was  wont  to  call  him). 
"  Yea,"  said  he,  "  if  your  Majesty  had  not  been  better  to  me 
than  your  bishops  were,  your  pig  had  been  roasted  ere  this 
time." 

But  events  also,  perhaps,  contributed  to  mitigate 
the  King's  zeal  for  orthodoxy.  The  Council  of  Trent 
had  no  terrors  for  him  if  it  did  not  create  a  powerful 
combination  abroad,  or  if  Scotland,  aided  by  France, 
were  not  likely  to  invade  the  northern  counties,  and 
publish  at  last  the  papal  bull  of  excommunication 
issued  so  many  years  before.     His  armies  had  given 


cH.iii  KATHARINE  PARR  463 

Scotland  some  very  severe  lessons ;  but  now  a  still 
more  effective  blow  had  been  struck  to  secure  him 
ftom  molestation  in  that  quarter.  A  plot  had  been 
long-  on  foot  with  his  connivance  for  the  assassination 
of  Cardinal  Beton,  and  it  took  effect  this  year  on  the 
29th  May.  Then  France,  worn  out  with  the  long 
struggle,  made  a  peace  with  England,  which  was  pro- 
claimed in  London  on  Whitsunday,  13th  June.  In 
August  the  French  Admiral  d'Annebaut  came  over  to 
ratify  it,  and  was  received  with  the  greatest  possible 
distinction.  Henry  was  no  longer  in  so  great  fear  of 
what  the  Pope  might  do  to  him.  He  was  rather 
considering  how  to  turn  the  situation  still  further  to 
his  advantage,  and  get  Francis  to  take  part  with  him 
against  the  Pope,  so  as  to  put  an  end  to  the  Council. 
For  this — indeed,  a  good  deal  more  than  this — is 
distinctly  indicated  in  a  conversation  which  took  place 
between  Archbishop  Cranmer  and  his  registrar,  Ralph 
Morice,  in  the  following  reign  ;  and  the  record  of  what 
was  said  is  altogether  so  remarkable  that  we  had 
better  read  the  very  words  : — 


"  I  am  sure  you  were  at  Hampton  Court,"  quoth  the 
Archbishop,  "  when  the  French  King's  ambassador  was  enter- 
tained there  at  those  solemn  banqueting  houses,  not  long 
before  the  King's  death ;  namely,^  when  after  the  banquet 
was  done  the  first  night,  the  King  was  leaning  upon  the 
ambassador  and  upon  me :  if  I  should  tell  what  communica- 
tion between  the  King's  Highness  and  the  said  ambassador 
was  had,  concerning  the  establishing  of  sincere  religion  then, 
a  man  would  hardly  have  believed  it;  nor  had  I  myself 
thought  the  King's  Highness  had  been  so  forward  in  those 
matters  as  then  appeared.  I  may  tell  you,  it  passed  the 
pulling  down  of  roods  and  suppressing  the  ringing  of  bells. 
I  take  it  that  few  in  England  would  have  believed  that  the  au  inter- 
King's  Majesty  and  the  French  King  had  been  at  this  point,  national 
not  only,  within  half  a  year  after,  to  have  changed  the  mass  p^°p°^*'- 
in  both  the  realms  into  a  communion  (as  we  now  use  it)  but 
also   utterly  to  have  extirped  and  banished  the  Bishop  of 

'  "Namely,"  i.e.  especially. 


464  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Rome  and  his  usurped  power  out  of  both  their  realms  and 
dominions.  Yea,  they  were  so  thoroughly  and  firmly  resolved 
in  that  behalf  that  they  meant  also  to  exhort  the  Emperor  to 
do  the  like  in  Flanders  and  other  his  countries  and  seigniories, 
or  else  they  would  break  off  from  him.  And  herein  the 
King's  Highness  willed  me,"  quoth  the  Archbishop,  "  to  pen 
a  form  thereof  to  be  sent  to  the  French  King  to  consider  of. 
But  the  deep  and  most  secret  providence  of  Almighty  God, 
owing  to  this  realm  a  sharp  scourge  for  our  iniquities,  pre- 
vented for  a  time  this  their  most  godly  device  and  intent, 
by  taking  to  his  mercy  both  these  princes." 

Is  it  no  part  of  history  to  take  note  of  the  day- 
dreams of  princes  ?  When  schemes  are  seriously 
talked  about  they  may  be  very  far  indeed  from 
realisation,  and  after  ages  may  think  them  utterly 
incredible,  they  are  so  unlike  reality.  They  were  mere 
visions  at  the  time,  and  even  to  the  diplomatists 
themselves  their  realisation  may  have  been  very 
doubtful.  Months  and  years  rolled  on,  and  they  were 
lost  in  the  darkness  of  oblivion.  But  nothing  brings 
the  past  before  us  more  truly  than  the  picture  of  what 
might  have  been,  or  even  of  what  able  men  might 
have  conceived  possible.  The  Papacy  was  not  so  feeble 
a  thing,  even  in  the  days  of  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  as  it 
was  in  the  first  half  of  the  sixteenth  century — so 
feeble,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  eyes  of  this  world's  rulers. 
Henry  did  not  despise  it  more  than  Francis  I.  or  than 
Charles  V.  himself.  What  thought  the  Emperor  of 
the  Papacy  during  the  sack  of  Rome  ?  What  thought 
Francis,  the  ally  of  the  Turk?  The  Pope  was  a 
convenient  figurehead,  perhaps ;  but  England  had 
shown  that  she  could  do  without  him,  Germany  had 
almost  done  without  him  also,  and  Francis,  too,  might 
have  been  induced  to  think  about  having  a  national 
religion  in  France,  free  from  papal  interference.  There 
was  life  enough,  at  least,  in  the  suggestions  to  weaken 
a  little  the  respect  for  what  was  going  on  at  Trent. 

But  no  doubt  it  was  true  that  Henry  VHI.  was 
nearing  his  end,  and  Francis  I.  soon   followed  him. 


CH.  Ill  KATHARINE  PARR  465 

Henry  died  on  the  28th  January  1547,  five  months 
after  the  French  admiral's  visit  to  England ;  and  the 
story  of  those  five  months  is  of  political  rather  than 
religious  interest. 


APPENDIX  TO  CHAPTER  III 

The  following  contemporary  letter,  which  is  referred  to  in 
a  footnote  at  p.  449,  is  of  very  special  interest  in  connection 
with  some  of  the  events  related  in  the  last  few  pages,  and 
the  reader  will  undoubtedly  be  glad  to  learn  what  was  said 
at  the  time  by  an  outside  observer. 

Otwell  Johnson,  a  Merchant  of  London,  to  his  Brother,  John 
Johnson,  of  the  Staple  at  Calais  (then  living  at  Glap- 
thorne,  Northants). 

[From  Ellis's  Original  Letters,  Second  Series,  ii.  172-8.] 

At  London,  the  2nd  in  July  1546. 

[The  first  part  of  the  letter  relates  to  domestic  and  business 
matters.  Then  a  rumour  is  reported  that  the  Emperor  is  going  to 
raise  men,  "  and  that  his  quarrel  against  the  Germans  was  not  for 
any  cause  of  religion,  but  for  their  certain  disobedience  against  him 
in  things  that  concern  the  Empire.  Most  men  else  think  otherwise; 
but  vous  connoissez  Vhomme."'\ 

Our  news  here  of  Dr.  Crome's  canting,  recanting,  decanting,  or 
rather  double  canting,  be  these : — That  on  Sunday  last,i  before  my 
lord  Chancellor,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  my  lord  Great  Master, 
Mr.  Riche,  Mr.  Chancellor  of  the  Tenths,  with  the  Suthwells,  Pope, 
and  other  nobles  and  knights,  and  on  the  other  side  the  Bishops  of 
London  and  Worcester,  all  principal  doctors  and  deans,  besides  gay 
grey  amices  ^  and  a  rabble  of  other  marked  people,  the  reverend 
father  just  named  openly  declared  his  true  meaning  and  right 
understanding  (as  he  said,  and  according  to  his  conscience)  of  the 
six  or  seven  articles  you  heard  of,  as  he  should  have  done  upon  the 
second  Sunday  after  Easter,^  but  that  he  was  letted  from  his  said 
true  intent  by  the  persuasions  of  certain  perverse  minded  persons 
and  by  the  sight  of  lewd  and  ungodly  books  and  writings ;  for  the 
which  he  was  very  sorry  and  desired  the  audience  to  beware  of  such 
books,  for  under  the  fair  appearance  of  them  was  hidden  a  dangerous 

^  27th  June.  -  Furred  tippets  worn  by  the  clergy.  3  g^}^  May. 

VOL.   II  2  H 


466  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

accombrance  of  Christian  consciences,  and  so  exhorted  all  men 
to  embrace  auncientnes  of  Catholic  doctrine,  and  forsake  new 
fanggelnes. 

On  Monday  following  ^  quondam  Bishop  Saxon,  Mrs.  Askewe, 
Christopher  White,  one  of  Mrs.  Fayre's  sons,  and  a  tailor  that  come 
from  Colchester  or  thereabout,  were  arraigned  at  the  Guildhall  and 
received  their  judgment  of  my  lord  Chancellor  and  the  Council  to 
be  burned,  and  so  were  committed  to  Newgate  again.  But  since 
that  time  the  aforesaid  Saxon  and  White  have  renounced  their 
opinions,  and  the  talk  goeth  that  they  shall  chance  to  escape  the 
fire  for  this  viage ;  but  the  gentlewoman  and  the  other  man  remain 
in  steadfast  mind ;  and  yet  she  hath  been  racked  since  her  con- 
demnation (as  men  say),  which  is  a  strange  thing  in  my  understanding. 
The  Lord  be  merciful  to  us  all ! 

1  28th  June. 


CHAPTER    IV 

RESULTS    UNDER    HENRY   VIII. 

What,  then,  was  the  main  thing  done  as  regards 
religion  under  Henry  VHI.  ?  Scarcely  any  one  has 
seriously  denied  that  he  was  a  tyrant,  and  it  is  a 
popular  impression  that  he  forced  religion  into  a  new 
mould, — some  consider  that  he  actually  changed  it. 
That  he  did  force  it  into  new  conditions  seems  to  me 
undeniable ;  but  if  he  made  any  essential  change  we 
shall  be  driven  to  consider  whether  the  new  religion 
was  not  actually  a  departure  from  old  revealed  truth, 
or  at  least  from  a  divinely  ordained  authority.  In 
answer  to  this  suggestion,  there  is  one  consideration, 
at  least,  on  which  we  may  safely  rest.  It  is  not  in 
the  power  of  tyranny  to  deflect  the  rays  of  divine 
truth ;  and  no  community  or  nation  that  had  really 
parted  company  with  vital  Christianity  could  hope  to 
maintain  its  place  in  a  progressive  civilisation.  True 
enough,  there  are  always  doubters,  and  many  positive 
unbelievers.  There  were  such  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
and  there  are  many  now.  The  world  at  all  times 
seems  too  much  for  the  Church,  and  when  secular 
interests  and  secular  thoughts  become  too  powerful 
for  conventional  restraints,  it  is  amazing  how  little 
regard  is  paid  to  old  guarantees  for  the  maintenance 
of  a  pure  national  faith,  and  the  sacredness  of 
nationality  itself  as  a  thing  ordained  of  God. 

But  in  such  revolutions  a  rough  justice  may  still 
be  found.     Hypocrisy  is  to  some  extent  unveiled,  and 

467 


468   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

the  unreality  of  much  affected  reverence  is  laid  aside. 

Abuses,  too,  are  corrected  by  a  severe  scourge ;    but 

essential  truth  remains.      Religion  may  pass  under 

new  conditions  :  a  yoke  which  seems  quite  insufFer- 

Tyranny    able  may  be  laid  upon  it  in  one  age  ;  but  the  ultimate 

crush\he  i^esult  must  be  that  men  know  better  than  before  for 

truth ;      what  they  ought  to  live,  or  be  prepared  to  suffer. 

Divisions,  too,  may  result,  which  ought  certainly  to 

be    deplored   among    Christians ;    but   these  will  be 

mitigated  if  not  effaced  by  examining  the  essentials  of 

religion,  not  merely  by  the  light  of  the  individual 

reason,  but  by  thoughtful  contemplation  of  the  whole 

history  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

Things  which  abide  in  religion  must  have  truth  in 
them.  Heresies  fluctuate  and  change  their  character. 
The  heretical  thinker  may,  indeed,  have  his  own 
message  to  the  world,  and  the  Church  itself  must 
take  in  whatever  neglected  truth  he  is  endeavouring 
to  enforce  ;  after  which  his  mission  is  over.  But  the 
fabric  of  sound  dogma  cannot  be  overthrown  or 
mutilated.  What  has  really  been  ascertained  must 
remain  for  ever.  There  may  be  a  danger,  indeed,  in 
forcing  dogmas  which  are  over -subtle  on  general 
acceptance;  for  even  truths,  when  forced,  are  in 
danger  of  becoming  untruths  to  the  vulgar,  just 
because  they  cannot  be  truly  apprehended.  And 
above  all  things  it  is  desirable  that  what  truths  a 
man  once  receives,  even  in  his  childhood,  shall  dwell 
in  his  heart  through  life,  and  bear  fruit  in  his  general 
conduct.  If  he  is  troubled  about  his  faith,  let  him 
consider  what  things  have  been  generally  agreed  on 
by  Christians  of  all  ages,  and  be  assured  that  they 
were  not  agreed  on  without  inquiry.  The  things 
which  abide  in  religion  must  be  true. 
but  new  Yet  we  are  not  absolved  from  the  contemplation 

mustbr^  of  new  conditions   which  have  been  imposed  upon 
studied,     religious  life  in  different  eras,  and  of  our  inheritance 
in  those  conditions.     The  Reformation   may  be  the 


CH.  IV       RESULTS  UNDER   HENRY  VIII.  469 

fruit  of  tyranny  at  a  time  when  able  state-craft  had 
made  England  a  positive  despotism ;  but  it  does  not 
follow  that  good  has  not  come  of  evil ;  for  here,  too, 
we  must  consider  the  things  that  abide.  The  over- 
throw of  papal  jurisdiction  was  eflfected  by  the 
principle  of  Royal  Supremacy  over  the  Church ;  and 
Royal  Supremacy,  though  brutally  enforced  by  Henry 
VIII. ,  was  nevertheless  a  true  principle  and  remains 
with  us  still.  It  has  other  enemies  besides  the 
votaries  of  Rome ;  but  all  their  enmity  is  in  vain. 
The  principle  of  an  Established  Church,  however  at 
variance  with  theories  which  pious  minds  are  too  easily 
led  to  entertain,  is  one  which,  when  once  laid  down, 
can  never  be  set  aside.  What  we  call  in  these  days 
Disestablishment  is  really  Establishment  over  again. 
The  only  example  we  have  of  it  shows  this  clearly. 
For  the  Church  of  Ireland  is  now  a  State  Church  even 
more  than  it  was  before  1869.  It  is  a  Church  estab- 
lished by  Royal  Charter  under  an  Act  of  Parliament ; 
and  it  was  established  by  a  very  strong  exercise  of 
Royal  Supremacy.  Just  as  the  Church  of  England 
came  to  be  "  established  "  in  the  political  sense,  under 
Henry  VIIL,  by  successive  steps — first  by  subjecting 
the  clergy  to  an  extortionate  fine,  then  driving  them 
to  complete  submission  and  compelling  all  men  to 
abjure  the  Pope, — even  so  the  Irish  Church  was 
disestablished,  or  re-established,  first  by  a  sweeping 
confiscation,  and  secondly  by  inducing  the  clergy  and 
laity,  as  the  only  means  of  recovering  part  of  their 
lost  property,  to  elect  a  body  of  trustees  and  accept 
a  Royal  Charter.  It  may  be  that  the  nineteenth 
century  process  was  milder  than  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury process.  Certainly  it  was  so,  especially  as 
regards  individuals.  But  as  regards  the  Church, 
Disestablishment,  like  Establishment,  consisted 
simply  in  coercion.  The  political  principle  of 
Establishment  cannot  possibly  be  annulled,  and  if 
we  are  to  have  a  practical  religion,  and  not  a  mere 


470  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

chaos  of  sectarian  philosophies,  we  must  face  the  fact 
plainly. 
Permanent  Of  couisc  it  is  not  my  objcct  here  to  discuss  things 
^f^'h^^c  ^  done  in  our  own  days.  But  a  principle  that  cannot 
stitution.  be  annulled  is  surely  deserving  of  study.  Time  and 
experience  have  a  wonderful  influence  on  the  life  of 
nations,  changing  despotic  power  into  popular  govern- 
ment while  the  ruling  principle  behind  both  is 
absolutely  the  same.  To  this  day  the  King  is  the 
centre  of  the  Constitution,  and  all  things  pass  through 
him.  His  face  is  on  the  coinage ;  his  writ  opens 
Parliament  or  dissolves  it ;  the  nation's  acts  are 
his  acts,  and  no  interference  with  individual  liberty 
is  justifiable  except  by  summons,  arrest,  or  subpoena 
in  his  name.  It  is  true  this  does  not  mean  personal 
action  on  his  part,  but  action  through  a  number  of 
functionaries  who  derive  their  authority  from  him. 
And  in  matters  of  State  it  is  still  the  same.  The 
King  cannot  act  without  advisers,  nor  can  he  now 
(the  suggestion,  indeed,  is  monstrous)  use  advisers 
and  instruments,  as  Henry  VHI.  did,  merely  to  be 
flung  to  the  wolves  when  they  could  no  longer  serve 
his  purpose.  But  still  our  constitutional  principle  is 
the  same — that  the  King  can  do  no  wrong,  though  his 
ministers  may  deserve  censure.  And  ministers  now, 
when  dismissed,  fall  very  softly,  giving  place  to  others 
who  for  the  time  are  more  in  the  nation's  confidence. 
"  The  King  can  do  no  wrong."  The  words  sound 
paradoxical  and  untrue,  just  like  the  statement  that 
the  Pope  is  infallible.  But  no  Roman  Catholic  thinks 
the  Pope  personally  infallible ;  and  the  King,  like  the 
Pope,  is  not  a  mere  living  person,  but  an  institution 
as  well.  His  will  has  to  be  construed  according  to 
the  Constitution  ;  and  the  Constitution  holds  that  he 
can  do  no  wrong,  simply  because  there  is  no  higher 
Essence  of  power  ou  earth  to  correct  him.  Here  at  once  we 
the  change  comc  to  the  great  diff'erence  between  the  mediaeval 

iiiiQ.6r 

Henry        and  the  modern  world.     Before  the  days  of  Henry 

VIII. 


CH.  IV       RESULTS   UNDER   HENRY  VIII.  471 

VIII.  no  one  doubted  that  kings  could  do  very  much 
wrong,  and  that  there  was  a  power  to  correct  kings 
who  did  wrong.  Henry  II.  and  King  John  felt  that 
power  and  were  obliged  to  bow  to  it.  Henry  VIII. 
himself,  as  we  have  seen,  was  not  altogether  confident 
that  he  too  might  not  have  to  submit  in  the  end.  But 
he  succeeded — partly  by  his  own  astuteness,  partly 
through  the  jealousies  of  secular  princes  abroad — in 
avoiding  or  warding  ofif  every  danger ;  and  from  his 
day  there  has  been  no  spiritual  rule  in  England,  from 
a  foreign  centre,  capable  of  controlling  the  action  of 
the  sovereign.  How  great  a  result  this  is,  and  how 
beneficial  on  the  whole,  we  in  the  twentieth  century 
have  great  difficulty  in  fully  comprehending. 

Before  the  Reformation  a  priest  was  esteemed  by 
the  devout  more  highly  than  a  king.  He  had  really 
higher  functions.  To  dispense  the  sacraments — especi- 
ally to  give  the  Body  of  Christ  to  His  followers — was 
a  more  awful  privilege  than  any  with  which  royalty 
was  invested.  And  this  was  not  a  mere  matter  of 
sentiment  to  each  individual  Christian,  but  the  Church 
itself,  as  a  spiritual  community,  could  enforce  high 
truths,  or  what  were  so  regarded,  by  an  organisation 
entirely  independent  of  the  laws  of  the  land.  The 
laws  of  the  land,  indeed,  respected  the  laws  of  the 
Church  as  those  of  a  superior  Power ;  and  any  lower- 
ing of  the  prerogatives  of  the  Church  was  considered 
profanity.  True  enough  it  is  that  there  were  conflicts 
at  times  between  the  two  jurisdictions,  but  the 
superiority  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church  was 
never  questioned  in  theory.  These  conflicts  were  at 
times  matters  for  adjustment,  or  attempted  adjust- 
ment, as  in  the  famous  Constitutions  of  Clarendon, 
which  Becket  so  strongly  withstood.  But  adjust- 
ments could  only  be  made  with  the  consent  of  the 
bishops,  who  in  matters  which  concerned  their  duty 
to  the  Church  were  not  the  King's  subjects  but  the 
Pope's  ;     and    so    arrangements    were   finally   made 


princes. 


472   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

in  many  matters  between  the  Sovereign  and  the 
Pope. 
Deference  Then  as  secular  powers,  towards  the  close  of 
Ko^me^to  *^®  Middle  Ages,  grew  continually  stronger,  they 
secular  were  commonly  treated  with  no  small  deference  by 
the  Holy  Father  at  Rome,  and  were  nowise  tempted 
to  defy  a  spiritual  authority  with  which  they  could 
always  make  very  good  terms  for  the  effective  govern- 
ment of  their  own  kingdoms.  Moreover,  secular 
princes  could  use  the  sword  against  their  enemies,  and 
the  gibbet  against  disloyal  subjects,  while  the  Church 
had  no  coercive  power  except  that  of  excommunica- 
tion. So  the  Church  had  no  positive  control  over  a 
prince  whose  deeds  were  not  bad  enough  to  merit 
such  a  penalty.  He  might  even  overrule  the  Church's 
supposed  rights  in  some  things,  and  must  be  allowed 
to  have  his  own  way,  unless  the  Holy  See  were  pre- 
pared to  use  the  strongest  spiritual  weapons  against 
him. 

How  much  latitude,  then,  could  the  Pope  allow 
to  princes   in  violating  the  prescriptive  rights  and 
ignoring   the    authority    of  the   Holy  See  ?      Prac- 
tically a  great  deal  was  allowed ;  for  princes  might 
be    at    war   with   the   Pope   himself  without   being 
declared  enemies  of  the  Papacy  as  a  principle.     They 
might  be  excommunicated,  too,  but  the  sentence  was 
always  liable  to  revision.      Popes  themselves,  more- 
over, were  temporal  princes,  and  even  Popes  might  be 
wrong  in  their  worldly  policy.     An  adjustment  was 
sure  to  come  some  day  between  secular  and  spiritual 
Henry      authority.    The  one  unprecedented  feature  in  the  case 
breicb      °^  Henry  VHI.  was  that,  when  he  saw  no  other  way  to 
with        vindicate  his  own  self-will,  he  threw  off  papal  authority 
un^ece-   altogether,  and  not  only  did  so  himself  as  sovereign 
dented,     but  causcd  all  his  subjects  likewise  to  repudiate  it ; 
which  in  fact  they  almost  all  of  them  did,  taking  an 
oath  to  him  as  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England, 
however  some  might  mumble  between  their  teeth  "  as 


CH.  IV        RESULTS   UNDER  HENRY  VIII.  473 

far  as  the  law  of  Christ  permits."  That  such  a  quali- 
fication was  largely  made  in  the  hearts  and  minds  of  his 
oppressed  and  discontented  subjects  there  is  no  reason 
whatever  to  doubt.  But  what  else  could  they  do  ? 
A  whole  nation  could  not  allow  itself  to  be  butchered 
piecemeal  as  traitors  till  other  nations,  laying  aside 
their  jealousies,  could  agree  on  a  crusade  against  that 
Turk  in  the  West,  who  was  really  far  more  cruel  to 
the  Saints  of  God  than  the  Turk  who  overran  Hungary. 
Machiavellism  had  paralysed  all  political  action  for 
good  ;  and  as  regards  the  duty  of  the  individual  sub- 
ject, did  not  religion  itself  admit  that  he  was  bound 
to  his  prince  ?  Men  settled  down  into  silent  acqui- 
escence with  a  new  spiritual  authority,  half  believing, 
at  first,  that  it  could  not,  in  the  nature  of  things, 
last  long.  But  time  brought  no  relief  to  those  who 
still  adhered  to  the  old  ideal ;  and  subjects  threw 
the  responsibility  of  the  change  upon  their  sovereign. 
Even  Irish  chieftains — universally,  so  far  as  we  can  Even  Irish 
tell — each  severally  renounced  the  Pope,  and  gave  Jenounc? 
in  his  submission  to  Henry  VIII.  after  he  had  assumed  the  Pope. 
the  title  of  "  King  of  Ireland."  ' 

It  was,  indeed,  one  of  the  most  singular  proofs  of 
the  success  of  Henry's  policy  that  towards  the  end  of 
the  reign,  after  laying  aside  that  inferior  title,  "  Lord 
of  Ireland " — which  only  pointed  to  the  fact  that 
dominion  over  the  island  was  a  papal  gift  inherited 
from  Henry  II. — and  calling  himself  King  of  that 
country,  he  succeeded,  to  all  appearance,  in  bringing 
it  into  more  complete  subjection  than  at  any  time 
before.  All  that  he  required  to  secure  himself  against 
the  world  and  against  Rome,  was  to  bring  Scotland 
into  a  like  obedience ;  which  he  attempted,  as  is  well 
known,  by  a  cruel  war  waged  to  enforce  a  matrimonial 
project  for  the  union  of  the  northern  and  southern 
kingdoms.      That  object  he  could  not   attain ;    and 

1  See  Calendar  of  the  Carew  MSS.,  vol.  i.,  Nos.  159,  160,  163,  164,  165, 
167,  171,  172,  173,  184. 


474  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

yet  his  success  in  warding  off  interference  from  Scot- 
land, first  by  playing  off  Scottish  factions  against  each 
other,  secondly  by  ruthless  invasions,  and  thirdly  by 
procuring  the  murder  of  Cardinal  Beton,  just  as 
England  was  about  to  make  peace  with  France,  and 
thereby  deprive  Scotland  of  aid  from  her  old  ally,  was 
surely  very  remarkable.  In  matters  of  high  policy 
moral  scruples  never  stood  in  his  way ;  and  his 
political  insight  was  clearer  than  that  of  any  other 
contemporary  sovereign. 

As  in  his  foreign,  so  too  was  it  in  his  domestic 
policy,  particularly  in  Church  matters.  From  the 
day  that  he  took  that  bold  and  unprecedented 
step,  which  he  put  off  as  long  as  possible  after 
threatening  to  take  it  for  years — repudiating  papal 
jurisdiction  and  making  himself  Supreme  Head  of 
the  Church  in  his  own  kingdom, —  he  was  well 
aware  that  it  must  be  enforced  by  the  most  cruel 
laws  wrung  from  a  really  reluctant  Parliament,  com- 
posed, as  even  that  Parliament  was,  of  his  own 
creatures.  By  these  laws,  and  by  the  atrocious 
cruelty  with  which  they  were  executed,  the  spirit  of 
the  nation  was  completely  tamed.  But  amid  the  sad 
spectacle  of  national  oppression  we  may  still  note  the 
Henry  fact  that  the  tyrant  invariably  sought  plausible  argu- 
piausibie  ments  to  justify  his  procedure,  giving  his  subjects,  if 
fnSe^nce  P^^^i^jle,  uo  grouud  for  rebellion,  and  foreign  princes 
of  Ms  no  ground  for  interference.  Of  such  pretexts,  both 
tyranny,  j^jg  timorous  subjccts  and  foreign  princes  who  were 
not  at  war  with  him  were  only  too  willing  to  avail 
themselves ;  and  the  fact  that  he  was  himself  an 
adept  in  technical  theology  and  a  subtle  casuist,  gave 
all  the  greater  weight  to  his  authority.  Who  could 
dispute  matters  with  a  king  who  had  a  reason  for 
everything  he  did,  and  could  confound  any  ordinary 
objector  by  his  logic  no  less  than  by  his  laws  ?  Nay, 
some  of  his  own  ablest  bishops,  like  Gardiner  and 
Tunstall,  withstood  him  in  argument  now  and  then 


CH.  IV        RESULTS   UNDER  HENRY  VIII.  475 

just  as  far  as  they  dared,  and  then  tendered  a  wise 
submission.^ 

He  had  taken  the  Pope's  place  and  become  the 
Supreme  Spiritual  Ruler  of  his  own  realm.  The 
claim  was  admitted  because  it  could  not  be  with- 
stood. He  had  acted  with  great  solemnity  as  Supreme 
Judge  in  a  case  of  heresy,  and  had  sentenced  a  poor 
man  to  the  flames,  as  no  King  of  England  had  done 
before.  But  for  the  most  part  he  acted  as  Spiritual 
Ruler  behind  a  screen  ;  Cranmer,  or  Cromwell,  or 
the  bishops,  were  to  bear  all  the  responsibility.     The 

^  Tunstall  had  a  controversy  with  the  King  on  the  subject  of  Royal 
Supremacy  which  has  not  been  noticed  hitherto  by  Church  historians,  owing 
to  the  bhinders  of  editors  and  the  misdating  of  documents  ;  so  I  take  this 
opportunity  of  putting  the  facts  in  a  true  light.  In  1531,  when  the  See  of 
York  was  vacant,  Tunstall  naturally  presided  in  the  York  Convocation, 
where  there  was  only  one  bishop  besides  himself,  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle. 
The  Southern  Convocation  had  already  passed  the  article  with  the  qualified 
recognition  of  the  King  as  "  Supreme  Head  "  of  the  Church,  and  the  Northern 
assembly  was  expected  to  do  the  like.  But  even  with  this  qualification 
Tunstall  protested  against  the  title  —  indeed  the  qualification  itself,  he 
pointed  out,  might  be  taken  for  an  admission  that  by  the  law  of  Christ  the 
King  was  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  in  spiritual  things  as  well  as  earthly. 
This  protest  is  not  dated  in  the  register  of  Convocation  from  which  it  was 
printed  by  Wilkins  ;  but  it  was  notified  to  the  King  by  a  letter  dated  6th 
May  1531,  which  Henry  answered  at  great  length  in  another  letter,  first 
printed  in  the  collection  called  Cabala  in  1663.  The  editor  of  the  Cabala 
most  unfortunately  places  at  the  head  of  this  letter  (p.  244)  the  title  "  King 
Henry  the  Eighth  to  the  Clergy  of  the  Province  of  York,  Anno  1533," 
though  the  very  first  words  of  the  letter  show  that  it  is  addressed  to  a 
single  bishop  only,  and  internal  evidence  proves  the  year  to  have  been  1531. 
The  false  heading,  nevertheless,  is  repeated  by  Wilkins  (vol.  iii.  p.  762),  and 
has  misled  everybody. 

This  reply  to  Tunstall's  objections  is  a  good  specimen  of  Henry  VIII. 's 
finesse  as  a  theological  controversialist.  So  also  lis  another  letter  that  he 
wrote  to  Tunstall  {L.  P.,  v.  820)  in  answer  to  another  protest  by  him. 
Tunstall  had  felt  it  necessary  to  remonstrate  on  the  subject  of  a  publication 
issued  by  the  authority  of  the  King  and  Council  against  the  pre-eminence  of 
the  Pope  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  would  be  construed  as  showing  an 
intention  on  the  King's  part  to  separate  the  Church  of  England  from  the 
Church  of  Rome.  Henry  says  in  reply  that  he  is  supported  by  virtuous  and 
learned  men  in  the  opinion  that  it  is  no  schism  to  separate  from  the  Church 
of  Rome  ;  that  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  is  usurped  ;  that  to  follow  the 
Pope  is  to  forsake  Christ ;  and  that  no  Christian  princes  will  abandon  him 
on  that  account. 

As  to  Gardiner,  his  own  words  in  writing  to  the  Protector  Somerset  about 
his  relations  with  Henry  VIII.  are  remarkably  significant.  See  Foxe,  vi.  36. 
But  while  he  probably  used  greater  freedom  in  remonstrance  with  the  King 
than  any  other  bishop,  his  independence  must  have  sadly  given  way  when 
he  wrote  not  only  his  able  defence  of  Royal  Supremacy  {de  Verd  Obedientid), 
but  also,  dreadful  to  say,  a  justification  of  the  death  of  Fisher.  Under  Mary, 
he  bitterly  repented  his  past  subservience. 


476  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

Ten  Articles  were  superseded  by  the  Institution,  and 
the  Institution  by  the  Necessary  Doctrine,  and 
Cromwell's  Injunctions  came  before  and  after  the 
Institution ;  so  that  if  there  were  any  disputes  men 
might  blame  Cromwell,  the  bishops,  or  Cranmer,  just 
as  they  thought  fit,  for  no  one,  of  course,  would  dare 
to  blame  the  King.  And  the  authorities,  in  fact,  did 
not  agree  with  each  other,  nor  did  Cranmer  himself 
agree  with  any  one  of  them ;  for,  as  we  have  seen,  he 
pursued  a  policy  of  his  own  not  sanctioned  by  either 
books  or  injunctions,  forcing  his  own  clergy  in  some 
things,  especially  his  prebendaries  at  Canterbury,  to 
obey  his  orders  simply  as  Metropolitan. 

Strange  to  say,  there  was  not  a  written  order  or 
proclamation,  whether  of  Cromwell,  the  bishops,  or 
the  King  himself  in  matters  of  religion — for  that  which 
was  called  "  the  King's  Book  "  in  contradistinction  to 
"  the  Bishops'  Book "  expressed  far  too  high  sacra- 
mental doctrine  even  for  Cranmer  at  the  time  it  was 
issued — by  which  the  Primate  of  all  England  felt 
himself  bound.  Not  only  did  he  go  in  advance  of 
existing  rules  and  formularies,  as  when  he  declared 
that  all  images  were  idols,  showing  clearly  that  he 
would  like  to  have  them  all  removed  one  day  in  spite 
of  an  express  sanction  of  their  use  in  every  one  of 
the  three  authorised  formularies, — not  only  did  he 
countenance  positions  which  he  said  he  could  defend 
before  an  indifferent  judge,  provided  that  judge  were 
obtained  from  Germany, — but  he  had  even  once  gone 
himself  in  the  teeth  of  the  Six  Articles  in  a  lecture  on 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  declaring  that  it  was  only 
a  similitude.^ 
Cranmer  a  Cranmer,  in  short,  was  a  spiritual  despot,  supported 
despor  ^y  t^6  despotism  of  the  King.  The  terrors  of  the 
Act  of  the  Six  Articles  were  no  terrors  to  him ;  and 
his  clergy  stood  in  awe  of  him.  The  Court  was  above 
the  law,  and  the  Primate,  as  a  most  important  member 

*  See  p.  374  ante. 


CH.  IV        RESULTS   UNDER  HENRY  VIII.  477 

of  the  Court,  was  above  the  law  too.  He  did  not 
indulge,  of  course,  in  the  open  profanity  of  the  men 
of  Windsor  or  of  Sir  George  Blagge,  but  his  sacra- 
mental views,  we  may  well  suspect,  never  were  so 
high  as  those  required  by  that  statute  which  his 
master  took  so  remarkable  a  part  in  persuading  the 
House  of  Lords  to  enact,  even  in  the  face  of  opposition 
from  the  Anne  Boleyn  bishops.  And  though  he  was 
obliged  to  take  a  painful  part  in  the  prosecution  of 
the  unhappy  Nicholson,  refuting  the  heretic's  argu- 
ments— with  what  casuistry  or  mental  reservations  we 
cannot  tell, — it  may  be  that  the  very  fact  that  he 
had  done  so  created  secret  remorse  in  his  own  mind, 
as  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  did  in  that  of  St. 
Paul.  It  was  melancholy,  indeed,  that  the  Church 
of  England — or,  at  least,  a  considerable  part  of  it — 
should  be  under  the  control  of  such  a  Primate ;  for 
what  can  be  worse  than  that  authority  should  contra- 
dict authority  ?  But  still  we  must  not  do  Cranmer, 
the  man,  injustice.  We  cannot  vindicate  his  career ; 
but  we  may,  at  least,  admit  its  difficulties.  It  was  not 
by  his  own  will  that  he  was  set  in  a  position  where 
he  must  either  domineer  or  be  lost.  The  one  original 
weakness  on  his  part  was  recommending  hunself  to 
Court  favour  by  the  suggestion  of  an  appeal  to  the 
universities.  Henry  at  once  saw  the  value  of  that 
advice,  and  of  the  man  who  could  give  it.  On  the 
first  opportunity  he  made  Cranmer  Archbishop,  to  do 
him  further  service  ;  and  Cranmer,  not  without  a 
strong  presentiment  of  the  things  that  would  be 
imposed  upon  him,  delayed  coming  home  from  the 
Continent  as  long  as  he  reasonably  could.  At  last, 
when  seated  on  the  Archiepiscopal  throne,  and  familiar 
with  the  conditions  under  which  it  seemed  to  him 
Religion  must  live  in  his  day,  he  framed  for  himself  a 
religion  of  Royal  Supremacy — an  ideal  of  Christianity 
subject  to  earthly  power,  which  was  his  guiding 
principle  even  to  the  very  end. 


478   LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

But  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  one  man,  or  even  of 
three  or  four  men,  placed  in  high  positions,  of  them- 
selves to  bring  on  a  rehgious  revolution.  The 
elements  of  the  great  change  which  was  now  gather- 
ing strength  had  been  in  the  Church,  as  we  have 
seen,  long  before  Henry's  Act  of  Supremacy.  They 
were  in  their  own  nature  elements  of  lawlessness ; 
but,  favoured  by  the  power  of  the  Sovereign,  they 
could  no  longer  be  treated  as  lawless.  The  reader 
has  seen  what  Lollardy  was  long  before  the  Reforma- 
Principies  tiou.  Hc  has  sccu  also  what  it  was  in  Sir  Thomas 
undi°i!ri'If  More's  day ;  and  I  need  but  refer  to  the  analysis  of 
in  Henry  Morc's  Diologuc  which  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  the 
day. '  ^  first  volume  of  this  work,^  to  show  that  its  principles 
remained  precisely  what  they  had  been.  It  was  only 
that  the  printing  press,  the  circulation  of  Tyndale's 
Testaments,  a  touch  of  Lutheranism  at  the  universities, 
and,  most  of  all,  the  encouragement  given  to  heresy 
by  the  King  himself  as  soon  as  he  saw  that  he  could 
not  obtain  his  divorce  by  the  authority  of  the  Church, 
had  combined  to  favour  Lollardy  in  a  way  that  had 
not  been  seen  before.  The  stock  complaints  against 
the  old  Religion  were  precisely  the  same  as  they  had 
been.  Images  were  idols,  pilgrimages  and  prayers  to 
Saints  were  gross  abuses.  Scripture  was  the  one  rule 
of  faith,  and  the  burning  of  Tyndale's  Testaments 
showed  that  the  Church  authorities  hated  the  diffusion 
of  pure  Christian  truth.  The  so-called  heretics  claimed 
to  be  the  true  Church  of  Christ,  though  their  methods 
of  advancing  truth  were  not  plain-spoken  and  above- 
board. 
Henry  Now  Hcury  VIII. 's  reformation  of  the  Church,  it 

of\hem  ^     will  bc  sccu,  was  precisely  on  Lollard  lines.     Lollardy 
for  his  own  ^icl  Hot  suggcst  Royal  Supremacy,  but  Royal  Supre- 
purposes.     j^^^^y.^  when  the  King  had  made  up  his  mind  to  it, 
suggested  his  seeking  the  support  of  Lollardy.     Not 
that  this  was  a  consistent  but  a  variable  policy ;  for 

^  Appendix  to  Chapter  V.  of  Book  II. 


CH.  IV        RESULTS  UNDER  HENRY  VIII.  479 

he  could  disown  Lollard  support  whenever  convenient, 
and  there  were  times  when  it  was  desirable  to  do  so. 
But  those  who  favoured  Lollardy  could  never  afford 
to  disown  him ;  because  it  was  only  by  the  fact  that 
papal  authority  was  excluded  from  the  realm,  and 
even  episcopal  authority  liable  to  be  overruled,  that 
heretics  could  expect  to  have  their  own  way  in  any- 
thing. So,  after  the  Supremacy  had  been  vindicated 
by  cruel  butcheries,  and  the  monasteries,  which  de- 
pended more  on  Rome  than  the  clergy  at  large  did, 
had  been  overthrown,  Royal  power  began  to  act  more 
openly  upon  Lollard  principles,  setting  itself  against 
images  and  pilgrimages  and  things  that  savoured  of 
superstition  in  a  way  to  which  men  had  not  been 
accustomed.  It  was  not  a  question  with  the  King 
or  Cromwell,  or  even  with  Cranmer,  how  much  good 
there  might  still  be  in  old  institutions  like  the 
monasteries  whose  best  days  of  usefulness  were 
past,  nor  what  might  still  be  pleaded  for  other  old 
observances.  It  was  enough  that  there  were  some 
abuses  and  some  symptoms  of  decay.  The  spirit  of 
destruction  was  let  loose,  to  prevent  a  return  to 
Rome. 

The  wonderful  thing  is  really,  not  how  much  was 
destroyed  but  how  much  was  preserved — a  fact  which 
is  all  the  more  striking  as  the  destructive  policy  long 
survived  Henry  VIIL,  and  was  even  carried  further. 
But   conservative  principles  still   maintained   them-  But  con- 
selves  in  the  Church,  and  preserved  the  Church  itself  p^ucf^es 
Bishops  were  absolutely  necessary  to  the  policy,  alike  fought 
of  Henry  VIII.   and  his   successors,   though   abbots  ^^^'^' 
and  priors  were  not ;    and  the  old  bishops,  though 
sadly  at  a  disadvantage  with  such  a  king,  still  made 
their  influence  felt  in  many  things.     We  have  seen 
already  how  stoutly  they  fought  the  battle  in  Con- 
vocation   against    those   very   influences    which    the 
King  was  doing  his  best  to  foster,  how  they  brought 
back  the  authorised  teaching  of  the  Church  from  the 


480  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION  bk.  iv 

vagueness  of  the  Ten  Articles  to  a  more  and  more 
clear  enunciation  of  old  principles  ;  and  though  they 
were  thwarted  by  double-dealing  in  high  quarters, 
they  still  preserved  both  King  and  realm  to  some 
extent  from  the  reproach  of  apostasy  and  the  hostility 
of  other  nations. 

The  story  of  Lollardy  and  the  Reformation  does  not 
end  with  Henry  VHL  ;  it  had  in  truth  made  but  a 
beginning  when  he  died.  Lollardy,  by  itself,  was  a  far 
older  thing ;  but  Lollardy  as  a  driving  power,  though 
it  was  no  longer  called  Lollardy,  had  entered  on  a  new 
career  entirely.  The  King,  invested  with  a  spiritual 
authority  hitherto  quite  unknown,  had  made  large 
use  of  it  for  his  own  ends ;  but  for  his  own  interests, 
likewise,  he  had  to  keep  it  under  some  control.  And 
this  he  could  do  effectually,  first,  because  he  was 
wise  and  politic,  and  secondly,  because  religious  inno- 
vators had  no  other  refuge  and  were  bound  to  support 
the  new  spiritual  jurisdiction  that  he  asserted.  After 
he  was  gone  the  flood-gates  were  not  so  easily  closed, 
and  Henry  was  regretted  by  conservative  souls  as  a 
strong  and  able  sovereign  who  at  least  knew  how  to 
maintain  order. 

As  for  the  Reformation,  it  must  not  be  identified 

merely  with  Henry's  repudiation  of  the   Pope  and 

assertion    of  Royal   Supremacy.     That,   indeed,  was 

the  one  great  fact  which  has  dominated  the  history 

of  men    and   nations  ever  since.      A  new  era   had 

begun,  and  no  spiritual  power  on  earth  was  able  to 

bring  back  the  past.     Truth  must  grow  and  flourish 

A  freer       hcnccforth,  if  it  were  to  grow  and  flourish   at  all, 

under         uudcr  the  protection  of  Royal  Supremacy.      It  was 

Royal        j^Q  lono;er  to  be    scientifically    defined  and  authori- 

Supremacy.  ,     ,■       t'^   .  -,  i/^  ^/-^l  •^  r 

tatively  imposed  on  men  by  General  (Jouncils.  it 
must  have  scope  to  move  and  work ;  it  must  be 
discussed  among  common  men,  even  though  the 
arguments  might  lead  to  blows  and  civil  war  before 
they   found    a  settlement.      Lollardy    certainly   had 


cH.iv        RESULTS  UNDER   HENRY  VIII.  481 

broken  into  the  Church,  unrecognised  but  powerful ; 
and  it  could  not  be  met  and  eliminated  in  the  old 
fashion  when  once  it  had  secured  its  footing  there. 
The  unhappy  attempt  to  burn  it  out  in  the  Marian 
reaction  was  a  failure.  Royal  Supremacy  again 
asserted  itself  under  Elizabeth  with  a  tyranny  almost 
as  cruel  as  before.  But  Lollardy,  in  the  forms  of 
Calvinism  and  Puritanism,  reasserted  itself  likewise, 
and  almost  vied  with  Romanism  at  times  in  disrespect 
for  that  Royal  Supremacy  by  which  the  bondage 
of  Rome  had  really  been  thrown  off.  The  poor 
Romanists  could  be  lined  and  persecuted  ;  but  it  was 
Puritanism  that  would  not  be  controlled,  and  the 
bishops  were  no  longer  the  sort  of  men  to  control  it. 
Bishops  themselves  took  up  positions  that  might  well 
have  been  called  Lollard,  though  the  word  had  gone 
out  of  use.  Opposite  schools  of  thought  were 
developed  within  the  National  Church,  Yet  truly 
Catholic  principles  were  never  lost  sight  of.  The 
desire  was  to  include,  not  to  exclude,  all  thinkers  of 
whatever  tendency ;  and  it  is  remarkable  what  a 
broad  basis  was  laid  down,  even  in  Elizabeth's  day, 
for  the  reformed  religion  which  we  still  profess.  It 
does  not  seem  possible,  indeed,  that  we  can  make  it 
broader  now. 


VOL.  II  2  I 


INDEX  TO  VOLS.  I.  AND  II. 


Abell,  Dr.  Thomas,  chaplain  to  Kath- 
arine of  Aragon,  ii.  147,  217,  289 
Abingdon,  heretics  at,  i.  160,  161 
Acton,  Sir  Roger,  i.  80,  83 
Adamites  of  Bohemia,  i.  124 
Adeson,  Dr.,  i.  461 
Alane.     See  Alesius 
Aldridge,    Robert,  Bishop    of   Carlisle 

(1537-56),  ii.  195 
Alesius  (John  Alane),  a  Scotsman,  ii. 

279,  280,  319,  321-2 
Alexander  III.,  Pope,  i.  9 
Alexander  V.,  Pope,  1.  119,  121 
Alexander  VI.,  Pope,  i.  381 
Alfonso  V.  of  Aragon,  1.  163 
Alington,   Lady,   More's  stepdaughter, 

i.  472-3 
Allemand,  Louis  d',  Cardinal  of  Aries, 

i.  168 
Alnewiek,  William,  Bishop  of  Norwich 

(1426-36),  i.  157 
Alverius'  de  Planctu  Ecclesice,  ii.  64,  65 
Ammonius,   Latin  secretary  of  Henry 

VIII.,  i.  276 
Anabaptists,  ii.  302,  335,  337 
Anabaptists  and  Sacramentaries,  pardon 

to,  ii.  373-4 
Anderson's  Annals  of  the  English  Bible, 

ii.  250,  270 
Andrew,  Richard,cauon  of  Coxford,ii.lOO 
Angus,  Archibald,  Earl  of,  i.  381 
Annates,  or  first  fruits,  i.  257;  restraint 

of,  391,  449 
Anne   of  Bohemia,   Queen  of  Richard 

IL,  i.  120,  261 
Anne  of  Cleves.     See  Cleves 
Annebaut,  Admiral  d',ii.  431-2, 463,465 
Ap  Rice,  John,  i.  429  ;  ii.  53-7,  60,  62, 

78,  79 
Arches,  Court  of,  i.  249 
Argyropoulos,  John,  i.  265 
Aristotle,  study  of,  i.  372 
Aries,    Cardinal    of.       See    Allemand, 

Louis  d' 


Arthur,  Thomas,  a  heretic,  i.  394,  398, 

406  n. 
Articles,  book  of  (the   Ten),   ii.  278, 

304-5,    307-8,    310-12,     317-20, 

323-4,  330,  475,  479 
Articles  of  the  Faith  (Apostles'  Creed) 

in  English,  ii.  330 
Arundel,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury (1396-1414),  i.  54,  56,  57, 

61,  71,  78,  80,  88,  103,  111,  118, 

127,  129,  186,  225,  265 
his    constitutions,    i.  61-3,  65,  67, 

69,  71,  107,  162,  172,  183,  203, 

260,  262,  545,  570,  573 
his  death,  i.  262 
Arundel,  William,  15th  Earl  of  (1437- 

1487),  i.  249 
Arundel,   Henry,  18th  Earl  of  (1545- 

1579),  ii.  445 
Ascu,  Edward,  nephew  of  Anne  Askew, 

details  supplied  by  him,  ii.  451 
Ashton,  John,  B.D.,  i.  24-27 
Ash  ton,    John,    auditor    of    the    Aug- 
mentations, ii.  123 
Askew,  Anne,  i.  315  ;  ii.  202 
her  first  examinations,  ii.  426-30 
her  examination  before  the  Council, 

ii.  446-9 
her  further  troubles  and  martyrdom, 

ii.  449-55,  461-2,  466 
Askew.     See  also  Ascu 
Athequa,  George,  a  Spaniard,  Bishop  of 

LlandaflF  (1516-34  ?),  ii.  13  n.,  45 
Atherstone,  Warwickshire,  friars'  house 

at,  ii.  161 
Audeley,  Sir  Thomas,  Speaker  of  the 

Commons,  i.  302 
afterwards  Lord  Chancellor,  i.  433, 

460,  463,  472-3,  490,  495-8  ;  ii. 

131,  195,  200,  203,  465 
Augmentations,  Court  of,  ii.  92 
Augsburg,  Diet  of  (1530),  ii.  175 

Confession  of,  ii.  176,  316 
Austin  Friars.     See  London 


483 


484  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Ave  Maria,  the,  ii.  323,  355 
Avignon,  popes  at,  i.  9,  10,  264 
Axholme  Charterhouse,  i.  426 
Ayscough,  William,    Bishop    of   Salis- 
bury (1438-50),  i.  228-9 

Badby,  John,  burnt  in  Smitbfield,  i. 
67,  68 

Bagley,  Thomas,  vicar,  burnt,  i.  159, 
160,  161 

Baker,  Sir  John,  ii.  400,  408,  452  n. 

Baker,  Richard.     See  Turmyu 

Bale,  John,  bishop,  his  Brief  Chronicle 
of  Sir  J.  Oldcastle,  i.  75 
his  Scri^^tores,  i.  187 
his  Exaviinations  of  Anne  AsJcew,  ii. 
428,  447 

Ball,  John,  i.  10,  15-17 

Ballads  against  the  Old  Religion,  ii. 
170-74 

Bangor,  Bishop  of  (1534-9).  See 
Salcot,  John 

Bankes,  Richard,  printer,  ii.  290 

Baptism,  heresy  about,  i.  274 

Barclay  (Barkley  or  Bartley),  Alex- 
ander, friar,  translator  of  Brandt's 
Ship  of  Fools,  i.  570  n.  ;  ii.  162-4 

Barlow,  John,  Dean  of  Westbury,  ii. 
222-4 

Barlow,  Friar  Jerome,  i.  570  ;  ii.  164  n. 

Barlow,  Thomas,  prebendary,  ii.  222 

Barlow,  William,  Prior  of  Bisham, 
Bishop  of  St.  Asaph  (1536),  and 
then  of  St.  David's  (1536-48)  ; 
then  of  Bath  and  Wells  (1548- 
53,  deprived)  ;  then  of  Chichester 
(1559-68),  ii.  113,  133,  195,  298, 
307 

Barnes,  Richard.     See  Woburn 

Barnes,  Dr.  Robert,  Augustinian  friar, 
i.  307,  387-8,  398,  417  ;  ii.  165, 
168,   175-7,   185,   213,  217,  222, 
225,  253,  289,  314-6,  346,  380 
his  "supplication,"  i.  529-31 

Barnwell  Priory,  Cambridgeshii-e,  ii. 
115,  116 

Baron,  Joan.     See  Bocher 

Bartilmewe,  churchwarden  at  Canter- 
bury, ii.  360 

Bartley.     See  Barclay 

Barton,  Elizabeth,  the  "Holy  Maid" 
or  "  Nun  of  Kent,"  i.  453-6, 
461,  472,  541  ;  ii.  48 

Barton,  John,  priest,  i.  125 

Basel,  Council  of,  i.  135,  161,  163- 
170 

Basil,  Theodore.      See  Becon,  Thomas 

Basingstoke,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172 

Basset,  Sir  William,  ii.  151 


Batell,   William,    monk    of    Wymond- 

ham,  ii.  97 
Bath  and  Wells,  Bishop  of.     .See  Clerk, 

John  (1523-41) 
Batmanson,     Prior     of     the     London 

Charterhouse,  ii.  20,  22 
Batterste,  Mr.,  of  Canterbury,  ii.  370, 

397-8 
Baumbach,  Ludwig  von,  ii.  192 
Bayfield,  Richard,  heretic,  i.  530 
Beaufo,  William,  i.  190 
Beaufort,  Henry,  Bishop  of  Winchester 

(1405-47),  Cardinal  (1427),  i.  143, 

144,  147,  154-6 
his  Vicar-General,  Abbot  of  Chert- 

sey,  i.  146 
Beauvale  Charterhouse,  Notts,  i.  426  ; 

ii.  26,  30,  40 
Becket  (St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury),  i. 

5,  138  ;  ii.  126-7,  146,  148,  151, 

153,  155-6,  159,  335,  338,  341 
his  shrine,  ii.  151-3,  174 
"Becket's      house"      (the      Mercers' 

Chapel),  ii.  199 
Becon,  Thomas  (or  Theodore  Basil),  ii. 

380-1 
his  book,  David's  Harp,  ii.  381 
Bedford,  John,  Duke  of.  Regent,  i.  96, 

97,  134,  143 
Bedford,  Earl  of.     See  Russell,  John, 

Lord 
Bedyll,  Thomas,  Clerk  of  the  Council, 

Archdeacon,    i.    423,    429,     482 ; 

ii.    8,   15,  23-25,  28,  29,  33,  34, 

36-39,  48-51 
Beer  (or  Bere),  Richard,  Carthusian,  ii. 

38,  39 
Belenian,  Nicholas,  ii.  454  n. 
Belgrade,  defeat  of  the  Turks  at  (1456), 

i.  257 
Bell,  Stephen,  a  heretic,  i.  36 
Bellasis,  Dr.,  ii.  394-5 
Benedict  XIII.,  Pope,  i.  63,  119,  162 
Benedictine  (or  Black)  monks,  i.  130 
"  Benefit   of   clergy  "    limited,   i.   280, 

281 
Benet,  John.     See  Wolman 
Benett,  Robert  (and  his  wife),  ii,  377- 

378,  384,  401-3 
Berdon,  John,  Prior  of  Coxford,  ii.  100 
Bere.      See  Beer 
Bere,  John  de  la,  Bishop  of  St.  David's 

(1447-1460),      i.     253,    263-4, 

573  71. 
Bermingham,     Fulk,     Archdeacon     of 

Oxford,  i.  245 
Bermondsey,  St.  Saviour's,  ii.  127 
Bertholet    (or    Bartelett),    the    King's 

printer,  ii.  288,  305 


INDEX 


485 


Beton,  David,  Cardinal,  ii.  156 

his  murder,  ii.  463,  473 
Beverley,  Thomas,  canon  of  Bucken- 

ham,  ii.  101 
Bible,     the,     Wyclifife's     view    of,     i. 
11,  12 
his  translation  of,  i.  52  ;  ii.  297-8 
other  early   translations  of,   i.   113- 
115 
Bible,   the  English,   in    Henry  VIII. 's 
time,   ii.    223-4,    226,    246,    260, 
392 
Bible  read  aloud  in  St.  Paul's,  i.  315  ; 

ii.  300  ;  at  Calais,  ii.  341 
Bible,  use  of,   regulated  by  Statute,  i. 
302 
Coverdale's.     See  Coverdale,  M. 
Cranmer's  (1540),  ii.  295 
Matthew's,  ii.  281,  285,  293-4 
Taverner's,  ii.  285 

"the  Great  Bible,"  ii.    285-8,    291, 
293,  295,  334,  350  ;   condemned 
by  Convocation,  296-7,  301 
New  Testament,   translation    of,  by 
the  bishops,  ii.  268-9 

Tyndale's.      See  Tyndale,  W. 
Bigod's  rebellion  in  Yorkshire,  ii.  34 
Bilney,    Thomas    (burnt   at  Norwich), 
1.   393-405,   406  n.,   514,   544-5, 
567-9  ;  ii.  240 

Bingham, ,  ii.  364 

BLrde,  Thomas,  canon  of   Coxford,  ii. 

100 
Bisham       (or      Bustlesham)      Priory 

altered,  ii.  113,  114 
Bishop,  a  monk  of  Sion,  ii.  73 
Bishoprics,  Henry  VIII. 's  scheme  of, 

ii.  212 
"  Bishops'  Book,"  the.    See  Institution 

of  a  Christian  Man 
Bishops    inhibited    from    visiting,    ii. 

55,  56 
Bishops'  prisons,  i.  49 
Bishops.     See  Boleyn,  Anne 
"Black  Book,"  the,  ii.  84 
Black  Monks.     See  Benedictines 
Blackborougli    Nunnery,    Norfolk,    ii. 

99 
Blagge,  Sir  George,  ii.  462,  476 
Bleane,  Thomas,  of  North   Mongehan, 

ii.  392 
Blitheman,  registrar,  ii.  73 
Blockley,  Thomas,  monk  of  Worcester, 

ii.  62 
Bloneham  (or  Peck),  Laurence,  ii.  140 
Bocher  (or  Baron),  Joan,  ii.  372-4 
Bodley,  Sir  Thomas,  his  library,  i.  264 
Bohemia,   Wycliffe's    doctrines    spread 
in,  i.  118,  120-4,  189,  574 


Bohemians  at  the  Council  of  Basel, 

i.  165 
crusades  in,  i.  144,  145,  148,  164 
example  of,  i.  297 
prayers    for   the    conversion    of  the 

Bohemians,  i.  161 
sects  in,  i.  124,  135 
Bokyngham,  John,  Bishop  of  Lincoln 

(1363-98),  i.  28,  31,  34 
Boleyn,   Anne,  and  her  marriage  with 
Henry  VIII.,  i.    290,  293-7,  303, 
308,  311-12,  314,  328,  379,  380, 
382-3,    390,   392,  419,   420,  422, 
425,  429,  431,  437-8,  450,  453-5, 
461-2,    466,     470,     476,     482-3, 
503-4,    510,    517  ;    ii.    3,    4,  35, 
45-7,    52,  61,  62,  75,    138,    146, 
235,  265,  276,  306,  382 
Bishops  made  through  her  influence, 
i.    314;    ii.    280,    307,  310,    313, 
321,  353,  479 
her  fall,   i.   312  ;  ii.   107,  108,  138, 

139,  176,  222,  224,  309,  317 
her  elder  sister,  Marj',  i.  295 
her  father.      See  Wiltshire,  Earl  of 
her  brother.     See  Rochford,  George, 
Viscount 
Bolingbroke  (or  Onley),  Roger,  i.  337 
Bologna,  Council  to  be  held  at,  i.  164 

University  of,  i.  296 
Boniface  VIII.,  Pope,  i.  9 
Bonner,  Edmund,  Bishop   of  Hereford 
(1538-9),     of    London     (1539-49 
and   1553-9),    i.    308,   319,    320  ; 
ii.  202,  210,  286,  299,  300,  331, 
345,  373,  428-30,  437,  450,  465 
Bonvisi,  Antonio,  friend  of  Sir  Thomas 

More,  i.  502 
Books  : — 

The  Lantern  of  Light,  i.  90,  91 
Vision  of  Piers  Plowman,  i.  107 
Creed  of  Piers  Plowman,  i.  288 
Chastising  of  God's  Children,  i.  114 
Book  of  the  New  Law,  i.  147 
Examination  of  Thorpe,  i.  528 
The  ABC  for  Children,  i.  531 
"The  Primer,"  i.  531 
The  Psalter   (heretical   translation), 

i.  531 
The  Ploughman's  Prayer,  i.  531 
The  Donate,  i.  531 
Pathway  to  Scripture,  i.  531 
Sum  of  Scripture,  i.  531  ;  ii.  244 
The   Supper   of    the   Lord,    i.  539 

540  ;  ii.  265 
Tlie  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man 
(the  Bishops'  Book).     See  Alpha- 
betical 
The  Glass  of  Truth,  ii.  137 


486    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


The  Revelation  of  Antichrist,  ii.  244 
Wycliffe's  Wicket,  ii.  250-1 
Articles,  Book  of.     See  Alphabetical 
Necessary     Doctrine      (the     King's 

Book).     See  Alphabetical 
See    also    Alverius ;    Bury,    John ; 

Coverdale,       Miles  ;        Crannier, 

Thomas ;     Dormer,    Jane ;     Fish, 

Simon  ;  Gascoigne,  Dr.  ;  Higden  ; 

Langland,     William  ;       Marshall, 

William  ;        Netter,        Thomas  ; 

Pecock,    Reginald  ;    St.    German, 

Christopher 
Books,  heretical,  proclamation  against, 

ii.  461 
Booth,  William,    Bishop    of   Coventry 

and  Lichfield  (1447-52),  i.  229. 
Borde,  Andrew,  Carthusian,  ii.  20-23 
Boston,  Abbot  of  Westminster,  i.  464 
Botolf,  Gregory,  clergyman  of  Calais, 

ii.  341-2 
Boulogne,    besieged   by   Henry  VIII., 

ii.  413 
Bourchier,     Thomas,     Archbishop     of 

Canterbxiry    (1454-86),    Cardinal, 

i.  232-4,  237-8 
Bourges,  Synod  at,  i.  167 
Bowland,  Robert,  i.  54 
Boyneburg,  Dr.  George,  ii.  178 
Boxley  Abbey,  surrender  of,  ii.  122 
the  "Rood  of  Grace"  at,   ii.  123- 

132,  173,  290 
Bradmau    (Bradenham  ?),    Holy   Cross 

of,  i.  561 
Brandon,  Charles.     See  Suffolk,  Duke 

of 
Brandt,  Seb.,  his  Ship  of  Fools.     See 

Barclay,  Alexander 
Braybrooke,     Robert     de,     Bishop    of 

London  (1381-1404),  i.  42,  55 
Brewerne,  Oxon.,  Abbot  of,  ii.  69,  70 
Brian,  Sir  Francis,  ii.  138-9 
Bridgett,   T.  E.,  More's  biographer,  i. 

471,  542 
Briggs,  John,  sumner,  ii.  361 
Brightwell  (assumed  name).    See  Frith, 

John. 
Brightwell,   Thomas,    a   WycliflBte,    i. 

23,  59 
Brion,  Admiral,  i.  306 
Brittayne, ,  cousin  of  Anne  Askew, 

ii.  428,  430 
Broke,  William,  Carthusian,  ii.  41 
Bromholm  monastery,  Norfolk,  ii.  92 
Brooke,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  70 
Browne,  Dr.  George,  made  by  the  King 

Provincial     of    the     Augustinian 

Friars,  and  afterwards  Archbishop 

of  Dublin,  ii.  47-49,  160 


Browne,  William,  i.  126 
Brute,  Walter,  a  heretic,  i.  39,  40 
Bruton  monastery,  Somerset,  ii.  53 
Buckenham  Priory,  Norfolk,  ii.  101 
Buckingham,  Duke  of,  executed  (1521), 

ii.  158 
Buckmaster,  Dr.,  ii.  12 
Bugenhagen,  John  (Pomeranus),  i.  578 ; 

ii.  316 
Bullinger,  Henry,  of  Zurich,   the  Re- 
former, ii.  124,  126,  221,  436 
Bulls  from  Rome,  orders  to  arrest,  i. 

140-1 
Burchart,   Francis,  Vice-Chancellor  of 

Saxony,  ii.  168,  178,  180,  185,  192 
Burgoyn,  Barth.,  ii.  41 
Burning  for   heresy,    i.   51,    63.      See 

More,  Sir  T. 
Burton-on-Trent,  image  of  St.  Modwen 

at,  ii.  150 
proposed  college  at,  ii.  212 
Bury,   John,  friar,  his    Oladius   Salo- 

monis,  i.  238-42 
Bury,  William,  Prior  of  Wymondham, 

ii.  97,  98 
Bury  St.  Edmund's,  ii.  74 

Abbey,  ii.  79,  133 
Bustlesham.     See  Bisham 
Butley,  Suffolk,  monastery  of,  ii.  133 
Buttes,   Dr.  (Sir  William),  the  Court 

physician,  ii.  20,  28,  90,  395,  407, 

417-20 
Buxton,  image  of  St.  Anne  at,  ii.  150, 

173 
wells  of,  ii.  151 

Calais,  reading  of  the  Bible  in  church 
at,  ii.  341 
conferences  with  Lutheran  envoys  at, 
ii.  431 

Calixtines  of  Bohemia,  i.  124,  165 

Calixtus  III.,  Pope,  i.  243-4 

Calle,  John,  chaplain,  i.  147 

Calvin,  John,  the  Reformer,  i.  333  ; 
ii.  387 

Calvinism,  a  form  of  Lollardy,  ii.  481 

Cambridge  University,  i.  295  ;  ii.  57, 
212 
St  Nicholas'  (King's)  College,  i.  254, 

265 
Gonville  Hall,  ii.  239 
Corpus  Christi  College,  ii.  395 

Cambridge,  Richard,  Earl  of,  his  con- 
spiracy against  Henry  V.,  i.  84,  85 

Cambridge,  Richard,  monk  of  Wymond- 
ham, ii.  97 

Campeggio,  Laurence,  Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury (1524  -  34),  cardinal  and 
legate,  i.  293,  386,  445  ;  ii.  13  n. 


INDEX 


487 


Candish,  Mr.,  i.  349,  350 
Canon  law,  revision  of  the,  ii.  412 
Cannonis,  Master,  ii.  64 
Canterbury,    heretic  at,    reclaimed  by 
Henry  VII.,  i.  273-4 
Cathedral  of  Christchurch,   ii.   212, 

365 
preachers  in,  i.  315 
prebendaries       of,       complain       of 

Cranmer,  ii.  394 
refoundation  of,  ii.  359 
All  Hallows  Church,  ii.  385 
St.  Alphege's  Church,  ii.  368 
St.  Alphege's  Church,  parson  of  (H. 

Chirden),  ii.  370 
St.  Augustine's  monastery,  ii.  156 
St.  George's,  parson  of  (John  Tofer), 

ii.  360 
St.  Sepulchre's,  i.  453 
Canterbury,  Archbishops  of.     See  Sud- 
bury,Simon(1375-81) ;  Courtenay, 
William     (1381  -  96) ;      Arundel, 
Thomas   (1396-1413);    Stafford, 
John  (1443-62) ;  Bourchier,  Thos. 
(1454  -  86) ;     Warham,     William 
(1503  -  32)  ;      Cranmer,     Thomas 
(1533-56) 
Archbishop  invested  with  new  powers, 
i.  475 
Canterbury,    Convocation   of,    i.    299, 
300,  388,  403,  445-7,  462  ;  ii.  90, 
91,  260,  265-6,  295,  350,  412 
Canterbury,     St.     Thomas     of.       See 
Becket 
pilgrimages  to,   ii.    172.      See   also 
Becket 
Canyng,   Thomas,    Mayor   of    London 

(1456),  i.  231 
Capon,  John,  abbot  and  bishop.     See 

Salcot 
Cardine.     See  Cawarden 
Cardmaker  (or  Taylor),  Dr.  John,   ii. 

443-5 
Carlisle,  Bishops  of.     See  Lumley,  M. 
(1430  -  50) ;      Aldridge,      Robert 
(1537-56) 
Carlisle  Cathedral   Monastery  to  be  a 

college,  ii.  212 
Carlstadt    (Carlostadius),   the  German 

theologian,  i.  578 
Carne,    Sir    Edward,    ambassador,     i. 

330-1  ;  ii.  187,  217 
Carthusians.     See  Charter  House 
Castillon,  French  Ambassador,  ii.  184, 

189-91 
Castilten,  W.,  Abbot  of  Wymondham, 

ii.  98 
Castleacre  Priory,  a  cell  of  Lewes,  ii. 
110-11 


Catton,  Robert,  Prior  of  Norwich,  ii. 

103 
Caultam,  a  place  of  pilgrimage,  ii.  172 
Cawarden  (Cardine),   Sir   Thomas,    ii. 

401-3,  406,  407 
his  wife  Elizabeth,  ii.  404,  407 
Caxton,  W.,  the  printer,  i.  265-6 
Celibacy  of  the  clergy,  ii.  179 
Cephas,  error  about  the  name,  i.  62, 

225 
Ceremonies,  ii.  337 
Cesarini,  legate,  i.  163,  164 
Chaloner,  Sir  Thomas,  ii.  350  n. 
Chamber,   Geoff.,   Receiver-General  of 

Augmentations,  ii.  123 
Chamberlen,Thomas,  Abbot  ofWymond- 

hara,  ii.  97 
Channel  Islands,  spiritual  jurisdiction 

in,  i.  306 
Chantries,    Act   for  dissolution  of,  ii. 

435-6 
Chantry  priests,  ii.  82,  83 
Chapel  (or  Holbeche),  Robert,  chaplain 

of  Oldcastle,  i.  125 
Chapuys,     Eustace,    Imperial    Ambas- 
sador, i.  444,  450  ;  ii.   5,  51,  71, 

81,  188,  190,  276,  347,  349 
Charles  IV.,    Emperor    and    King    of 

Bohemia,  i.  120 
Charles  V.,  Emperor,  i.  291,  292,  304, 

324;    ii.    181-7,   189,   191,  193, 

204,  217,  346-8,  413,  431-2,  434, 

464 
Charterhouse  monks,  martyrs,  i.  304, 

311,  477-8,  483,  486,  488,  503  ; 

ii.  4,  136-7,  147 
Charterhouse,  London,  i.  421-9  ;  ii.  9, 

26,  29,  36-43,  49,  55 
suggested  orders  for,  ii.  14,  16 
order  for,  ii.  16 
Chartreuse,  the  Grande,  ii.  20,  22 
Chatrys,  William.     See  Sawtre 
Chaucer,  the  poet,  i.  5,  37,  251 
Chauncy,  Maurice,  Carthusian,  and  his 

writings,  i.  423-4,  426  ;  ii.  10, 16, 

28,  30,  36,  40,  42 
Chelsea,  More's  house  at,  i.  503 
Cherdian.     See  Chirden 
Chertsey,  abbey,  ii.  74,  108,  113 

Abbot  of,  i.  146.    See  Cordrey,  John 
Chester,  St.  Werburgh's  Abbey,  ii.  115 
to  be  a  college,  ii.  212 
rood  of,  ii.  172 
Chichele,  Henry,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury (1414-43),   i.    89,   93,   124, 

126-8,  133-4,  144,  151, 156,  162 
censured  by  Pope  Martin  V. ,  i.  135-9 

262 
hLs  appeals,  i.  140-4 


488     LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


holds  a  Convocation  (1428),  i.  147, 

149 
orders    prayers    for    conversion    of 

Bohemians  (1432),  i.  161 
Chichester,    Bishops    of.      See   Praty, 

Richard  (1438-45) ;  Moleyns,  Ad. 

de  (1445-50)  ;   Sherboume,  Robt. 

(1507-36);      Sampson,     Richard 

(1536-43)  ;  Day,  George  (1543-51 

and  1553-6)  ;  Scory,  John  (1652- 

1553). 
Chirden    (or    Cherdian),     Humphrey, 

parson  of  St.   Alphege's,   Canter- 
bury, ii.  370,  379,  397-8 
"Chrisom,"  ii.  336 
Christian    II.    of   Denmark   (deposed), 

ii.  183,  186,  192 
Christian   III.    of  Denmark,   ii.    178, 

183-4,  186,  213,  216 
Church,  in  England,  the  pre-Reforma- 

tion,  i.  5 
Clanvowe,  Sir  John,  i.  41 
Clarence,  Duke  of,  brother  of  Edward 

IV. ,  i.  267 
Clarke,  Dr.  Adam,  i.  110 
Clarke,  George.     See  Joye 
Clarke  (or  Clerk),  Peter.    See  Payne,  P. 
Clement  VII.,  Pope,  i.  292-3,  609 
Clement,  Margaret,  ii.  39,  40 
Clerk,  John,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells 

(1523-41),  ii.  51,  321 
Clerk  (or  Clarke),  Peter,     See  Payne,  P. 
Cleves,  Anne  of,  ii.  185,  187,  215-17, 

223,  289 
Cleves,  John,  Duke  of,  ii.  181,  183-5 
Cleves,    William,    Duke    of,    ii.     181, 

183-5,  187,  213-16,  223 
Cleydon,  William,  Lollard,  i.  88-92 
Clitford,  Sir  Lewis,  i.  40,  162 
CliflFord,   Richard,   Bishop   of    London 

(1407-21),  i.  71,  89,  90,  151 
Cloney,  Richard,  apparitor  to  Bishop 

of  London,  ii.  379 
Cluniac  Order,  ii.  Ill 
Cobham,    Lord.       See    Oldcastle,   Sir 

John 
Cobham,  Lady,  i.  70 
Cobham,   Eleanor,  mistress  or  wife  of 

Humphrey,  Duke  of   Gloucester, 

i.  337 
Cochlifius,  ii.  235,  322 
Codde,   Robert,   Prior   of  Pentney,  ii. 

105 
Colet,  John,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  i.  571 
Colonna,     Prosper     de,     Cardinal     {t. 

Martin  V.),  i.  260 
Colyns,  mad,  i.  578 
Commandments,  the  Ten,  ii.  323,  330, 

334,  355 


Common  Prayer,  Books  of,  i.  319,  320, 

329,  332-3 
Commons,  House  of,  i.  448-50 
Communion,  Order  of,  i.  319 

in  both  kinds,  i.  329  ;  ii.  179 
Compton,  Dame  Elizabeth,  wife  of  Sir 

Pliilip  Hoby,  ii.  404,  407 
Confirmation,  ii.  179,  326-7 
Confiscation  of  Church  property  pro- 

pased,  i.  64 
Constance,  Council  of,  i.   63,  66,  118, 

119,  122-4,  135,  143,  162-4,  166, 

170,  186 
Constantine    (or  Constaus),    George,  a 

heretic,  i.   387,  528,  530  ;  ii.  164 

n.,  222,  224,  233-4,  236-7 
Constantinople,  fall  of  (a.D.   1453),   i. 

26i 
patriarch  of,  i.  167 
Contarini,  Caspar,  cardinal  and  legate, 

ii.  349 
Convocation.     See  Canterbury,  York 
special  (of   1536),  ii.  308-10.      See 

Correction  at  end  of  Index 
special  (of  1537),  ii.  320 
Conzo  de  Zwola,  nuncio,  i.  144,  145, 

148 
Cook,  Hugh,  last  Abbot  of  Reading,  i. 

142;  ii.  211 
Cooper,    Coper,    Couper,   or    Cowper, 

John,  accused  of  treason,  i.   343- 

353,  355 
Cope,  Alan,  edits  Harpsfield's  Dialogi 

Sex,  i.  358,  362-3 
Copinger,  a  monk  of  Sion,  ii.  26,  28,  40, 

42 
Cordrey,  John.  Abbot  of  Chertsey,  ii. 

113,  114 
Commonger,  Bartholomew,  i.  151. 
Cornwall,  Elmund,  Earl  of  (in  1267), 

ii.  144  n. 
Corpus  Christi  Day  processions,  i.  126 
Cotes,  Dr.,  of  Oxford,  i.  360  ;  ii.  382  n. 
Council,  a  General,  expected,  ii.   308, 

315,  318-19  ;  Henry  VIIL's  book 

against    it,    iL    331.       See    also 

Mantua 
Councils,  General,  of  the  Church.     See 

Basil,   Pisa,    Constance,  Florence, 

Lateran,  Lj'ons 
Courtenay,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Norwich 

(1413-15),  i.  80 
Courtenay,     William,    Archbishop    of 

Canterbury  (1381-96),  i.    19,  22- 

27,  37 
Coutances,  in   Normandy,  Bishop  and 

diocese  of,  i.  306 
Coventry    and    Lichfield,    Bishops   of. 

See  Ketterich,  John    (1415-19); 


INDEX 


489 


Booth,  William  (1447-52) ;    Lee, 
Roland  (1534-43). 
diocese  of,  ii.  78,  84 
Coverdale,    Miles,     translator    of    the 
Bible,  ii.  248 
his  earlier  career,  ii.  249-60,  271-4, 

281 
the  publication  of  his  Bible,  ii.  275-7, 

283,  297-8,  461 
engaged  on  the  Great  Bible,  ii.  285-6 
Covos,  secretary  to  Charles  V.,  ii.  217 
Cowbridge,      Foxe's    account     of     his 

"martyrdom,"  i.  360-2 
Cox,  Leonard,  i.  414 
Cox    (or    Coxe),    Richard,    Cranmer's 
Chancellor,  tutor  to  Edward  VI., 
afterwards  (1559)  Bishop  of  Ely, 
ii.  394-6,  437,  440,  449 
Cox,  William,  petty  canon  of  Canter- 
bury, ii.  367 
Coxford  Priory,  Norfolk,  ii.  92,  99 
Crabhouse     in     Wiggenhall,     Norfolk, 

nunnery  of,  ii.  79,  80,  92,  93,  95 
Cranmer,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury   (1533-55),  i.  295,   303, 
307,  314-17,  337,    385-6,    390-1, 
400,  420,  450,  453-4,  457,  462-6  ; 
ii.   13,  17,  33-5,   51,  55,  73,  82, 
88,  90,   130,   148,  151,  166,  168, 
180,    195-8,    222,    266,    268-71, 
279-82,    288,    294-6,    298,   307, 
316,  321-2,  324,  327,  331,  341-5, 
353,    359-62,   364-75,    392-400, 
408,  410,  412,  422-3,  432-4,  463, 
464,  475-7,  479 
his  Bible,  i.  103,  104 
his  house  at  Otford,  ii.  23 
his  deference  to  the  King,  ii.  343-5 
his  appointment  of  six  preachers  at 

Canterbury,  ii.  36 
he  declares    the  Sacrament  of    the 

Altar  only  a  similitude,  ii.  374-5 
the  "  conspiracies  "  against  him,  ii. 

366 
complaint  of  his  prebendaries  against 
him,  ii.  394  ;    and  of  others  also, 
413-22 
his  wife,  ii.  198  n. 
his  sister  a  bigamist,  ii.  364 
his     commissary.       See     Nevinson, 
Christopher 
Creed,  the  Apostles',  ii.  334,  353,  355 
"Creepiug  to  the  Cross,"  ii.  433 
Creighton,    Bishop,    on     the     English 

Reformation,  i.  3,  5 
Cr^py,  Treaty  of  (1544),  ii.  431 
Crome,  Edward,  D.D.,  i.  403  ;   ii.  15, 
33,  213,  380,  428,  435-46,  449  71., 
461,  462,  465 


Crome,  Robert,  ii.  446 

Cromwell,    Gregory,     son    of    Thomas 
(Lord),  ii.  113 

Cromwell,  Richard,  nephew  of  Thomas 
(Lord),  i.  466,  468 

Cromwell, Thomas  ( Lord ),  Henry  VIIL's 
secretary  and  afterwards  Lord 
Privy  Seal,  i.  307,  314,  341-2, 
368,  385-6,  421,  427-9,  432-5, 
448,  454-7,  460-1,  463,  466-7,  474, 
477-9,  482,  485-6,  489  ;  ii.  13-19, 
21,  23-6,  28,  31,  34,  36-8,  88, 
90,  108-111,  113,  117-18,  120-2, 
138,  140,  144,  146,  149,  151, 
160-4,  171,  180,  184-5,  188,  190, 
192,  194,  195,  196  n.,  210-11, 
216-17,  221-2,  224-6,  248-50, 
252-5,  264,  267,  274,  276-80, 
282-93,  299-301,  306,  309,  310, 
320-2,  324-5,  329-33,  346,  350, 
382  w.,  385,  444,  475,  479 
the  King's  Vicegerent,  or  Vicar- 
General  in  spiritual  matters,  ii. 
53-78,  90,  337-43 
hLs  Injunctions,  ii.  277,  329,  337-41, 

362-4,  475. 
Chancellor  of  Cambridge,  ii.  58,  59 
his  house  at  Stepuey,  ii.  10 
his  house  at  Austin  Friars,  ii.  255 
made  Earl  of  Essex,  ii.  216 

Crowley,  Robert,  writings  of,  i.  540  n. 

Crowmer,  William,   Mayor  of  London 
(A.D.  1414),  i.  79 

Cruciger,  Caspar,  the  German  Reformer, 
ii.  316 

Crumpe,    Henry,   regent  at  Oxford,   i. 
26,  27 

Cumberland,  Henrj"^,  first  Earl  of  (1525- 
1542),  ii.  75 

Cumberworth,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  251 

Curat,  alderman  of  Norwich,  i.  402 

Curayn,  William,  Lollard,  i.  161  n, 

Curson,  David,  of  Sion  monastery,  ii.  25 

Cusa,  Cardinal  de,  i.  256 

Dakyn,  Dr.,  ii.  323 

Dalaber,  Anthony,  i.  414 

Dante,  i.  8 

Darcy,  Lord,  ii.  5 

Dare,  Christopher,  ii.  427 

Darley,  John,  Carthusian,  ii.  17,  18 
his  vision,  ii.  18,  19 

Darvelgadarn,   image  in  N.   Wales,   iL 
146,  149,  174 

Daunce,     Henry.       See    Harridaunce 
John 

Davye,  John,  Carthusian,  ii.  38,  39 

Dawny,   Elizabeth,   Prioi-ess  of  Black- 
borough,  ii.  99 


490  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Day,   Dr.    George,    Provost    of   King's 

College,  Cambridge,  ii.  165,  345 
Bishop  of  Chichester  (1543-51   and 

1553-6),  i.  320  ;  ii.  43'2-3 
Daye,  John,  Foxe's  printer,  i.  334 
Debnam,    Robert,    of  Eastbergholt,    i. 

338-9 
Delawar,  Lord,  ii.  422 
Deinaus,  R.,  biographer  of  Tyndale,  ii. 

238,  258 
Demetrius,  Emanuel.     See  Meteren 
Denny,    Mr.    (Sir   Anthony),    ii.    395, 

407,  415,  420,  434 
Denny,  Lady,  ii.  452 
Derby,  Earl  of.     See  Henry  IV. 
Dertford,  Katharine,  i.  145 
Diets  in  Germany,  i.  171 
Dixon's    History    of   the    Church    of 

England,  i.  335 
Doile  (or  Doiel),  Sir  Henry,  i.  345 
Donald,  Father,  a  Scottish  friar,  i.  562 
Doncaster,  image  at,  ii.  149 
"Donyngton,"  a  place  of  pilgrimage, 

ii.  172 
Dormer,  Jane,  Lady,  ii.  9 

lite  of,  ii.  11 
Dorset,  Thomas,  ii.  81  «.,  88 
Dover  harbour,  ii.  81 
Dover,     Bishop    of.       See    Ingworth, 

Richard 
Dovercourt,  the  Rood  of,  i.  338 
Droitwich,  Austin  Friars  at,  ii.  161 
Drury,  Sir  Robert,  ii.  20 
Dudley,  John,  Lord  Lisle,  afterwards 

Earl    of   Warwick    and    Duke    of 

Northumberland,    i.    319-21  ;    ii. 

448 
Duns  (Scotus)  set  "in  Bocardo,"  ii.  58 
Durham,    Bishops    of.        See   Skirlaw, 

Walter    (1388-1406)  ;     Tunstall, 

Cuthbert  (1530-52  and  1553-9) 
Durham    Cathedral    Priory    to    be    a 

college,  ii.  212 

Earthquake,  Council  of  the,  i.  19 

Eborall,  Dr.  Thomas,  i.  246 

Edward  L,  i.  136 

Edward  III.,  i.  136 

Edward  IV.,  i.  267 

Edward  VI.,  i.  318,  326,  329;  ii.  82, 

88,  108 
his  death,  i.  321 
Elizabeth,  Queen,  daughter  of  Henry 

VIII.,  i.  311,  330-2 
excommunicated  by  the  Pope,  i.  335 
Ely,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172 
Ely,   Bishops  of.     See  West,  Nicholas 

(1515-33)  ;     Goodrich,     Thomas 

(1534-54) 


Ely  Monastery  to  be  a  college,  ii.  212 

chanting  priest,  ii.  387-8 
Elyot,  Sir  Thomas,  his  Dictionary,  ii. 

167 
Emans,  Thomas,  ii.  150  n. 
Emmanuel,  King  of  Portugal,  i.  294 
Enold.     See  Inolde. 
Erasmus,  i.  267,  276  ;  ii.  251 
Erpingham,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  97 
Essex,  William  Parr,  Earl  of,  ii.  448 
Esstield,  W.,  i.  153 
"  Established    Church "    principle,    i. 

303  ;  ii.  469 
Eton  College,  i.  254,  265 
Eugenius  IV.,  Pope,  i.  164,  166,  249, 

253,  260 
his   struggle    with    the    Council    of 

Basel,  1.  167-9 
Exeter,  Bishops  of.    See  Nevill,  George 

(1456-65) ;  Voysey,  John  (1519-51 

and  1553-4) 
Exeter,  Duke  of  (Thomas  Beaufort),  L 

97,  129 
Exeter,  Henry  Courtenay,  Marquis  of, 

ii.  157-8 
Exmew,  William,    Carthusian   martyr, 

ii.  8,  10-12 
Extreme  unction,  ii.  179 

Faith,  article  on,  ii.  353 

Fane,  Ralph,  ii.  122 

Farleigh,    Wiltshire,   a  cell   of  Lewes 

Priory,  ii.  108 
Farnese,  Cardinal,  ii.  349 
Faulfisch,  Nicholas,  of  Bohemia,  i,  121 
Faversham,  vicar  of,  ii.  392 
Felix  v.,   anti-Pope,  elected  at  Basel, 

i.  169,  259 
Fenning,  William,  i.  345,  351-2 
Ferdinand,  King  of  the  Romans,  ii.  175 
Feron,  Robert,  parson  of  Teddington, 

i.  430,  432 
Ferrar,  Robert,  Bishop  of  St.  David's 

(1548-54),  i.  356 
Ferrara,  Council  at,  i.  167 
Ferrers,  Lord,  ii.  422 
Fetherstone,  Richard,   martyr,  ii.  217, 

289 
Fewterer,  John,  Confessor  of  Sion,  ii. 

7,  25,  26,  28,  30,  40,  75 
Filioque,  the,  i.  167 
Filmer,  Henry,  i.  359,  384,  389-91 
Filoll,  Jasper,  ii.  13,  14,  17   19,  33 
Finch,  John,  ii.  128 
Fish,  Simon,  and  his  Siipplication  for 

the   Beggars,     i.     308,     517-24, 

527  ;  ii.  244 
Fisher,     John,     Bishop    of    Rochester 

(1504-35),   cardinal  and  martyr. 


INDEX 


491 


i.  297,  304,  311,  421,  425,  474-8, 
450-2,  454-6,  460-1,  463,  465-9, 
476-7,  479-89,  492,  499,  503, 
532-3  ;  ii.  4,  6,  8,  12,  18,  21, 
31,  52,  53,  59,  134,  136-7,  147 
his  servants  poisoned,  i.  447-8 

Fisher,  Robert,  the  Bishop's  brother, 
i,  480 

FitzJames,  Sir  John,  Chief  Justice,  i. 
498 

FitzJames,  Richard,  Bishop  of  London 
(1506-22),  i.  279 

Fitzwilliara,  Sir  William,  Treasurer  of 
the  Household  to  Henry  VIII.,  i. 
442  ;  ii.  74 

Fitzwilliam,  Lady,  ii.  452 

Fleet  prison.     See  London 

Fleming,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
(1420-31),  i.  149,  202 

Florence,  Council  at  (1439-42),  i.  167 

Fordham,  William,  monk  of  Worcester, 
ii.  60,  61 

Forest,  John,  friar,  ii.  146-9,  164,  174, 
290 

Formularies  of  faith,  ii.  304  sq. 

Foster,  Sir  Humphrey,  ii.  404 

Fountains,  Abbot  of,  deposed  by  royal 
visitors,  ii.  75 

Fox,  John,  Carthusian,  ii.  15,  30,  33, 
40,  42 

Fox,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Winchester 
(1501-28),  ii.  63 

Foxe,  Edward,  Provost  of  King's  Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  i.  405 
Bishop  of  Hereford  (1535-8),  i.  427, 
429  ;   ii.    175-6,    307,    310,    314, 
315,  320,  323-4 

Foxe,  John,  author  of  the  ' '  Book  of 
Martyrs,"  i.  39,  396-7,  400-401, 
404,  419  ;  ii.  171,  196,  210, 
257-8,  263,  286,  290,  294,  299, 
301,  382  n.,  390,  429,  433,  453, 
455,  457,  459,  460  71.,  461-2 
account  of  his  work.  i.  333-65 
his  brother  John,  i.  349,  354 

France,  war  and  peace  with,  ii.  413, 
462-3 

Francis  I.  of  France,  i.  290,  304,  484 ; 
ii.  42,  181-2,  189,  204,  214,  217, 
279  7^.,  285,  293,  431,  434,  463, 
464 

Franciscan  Friars  and  Pope  John  XXII., 
i.  33  11. 

Frankfort,  exiles  for  religion  at,  i.  331 
truce  of  (19th  April,  1539),  ii.  192-3, 
213-4,  224 

Free  Will,  ii.  353,  355 

Frederic  Barbarossa,  Emperor,  i.  9 

Frederic  III.,  Emperor,  i.  169,  259 


Friars,  the  Orders  of,  i.  462 
an  order  touching,  ii.  47 
they  are  unfrocked,  ii.  159-64 
Frith,  John,  Protestant  martyr,  i.  388, 
405-17,  419,  531  ;  ii.  461 
his  book  against  Purgatory,  i.  528 
translates  a  book  of  Luther's  under 
the  name  of  Brightwell,  i.  529,  539 
his  book   against  the   Sacrament,  i. 

415,  539 
answered  by  More,  ib. 
Froschover  of  Zurich,  the  printer,  ii. 

271,  274-6 
Froste,    John,    canon   of   Coxford,    ii. 

100 
Froude's  History,  i.  271 
Fry,  Francis,  on  Coverdale's  Bible,  ii. 

276  m. 
Fulk,  a  servant  of  Katharine  Parr,  ii. 

401 
Fuller's  Church  History,  ii.  71,  312 
Fyneux,  Chief  Justice,!.  283 

Gage,  Sir  John,  Controller  of  Henry 
VIII. 's  Household,  ii.  443 

Gailhard,  John,  Grand  Prior  of  the 
Carthusians,  ii.  22,  23 

Garadon,  Leicester,  monastery  of  ii. 
92 

Gardiner,  Germain  (Bishop  Gardiner's 
nephew),  i.  405-13,  416;  ii.  411, 
412 

Gardiner,  Robert,  of  Dedham,  i.  338-9 

Gardiner,  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester (1531-50  and  1553-5),  1. 
316-20,  368,  408-10,  479 ;  ii. 
12,  51,  74.  113,  166,  176,  180, 
195,  216,  289.  296-7,  307,  331, 
346-50,  354,  365,  378-9,  382  n., 
386,  396,  401-6,  408,  409,  411, 
418,  431-2,  434,  444,  448,  455-6, 
458-9,  474,  475  n. 
translates  the  Gospels  of  St.  Luke 
and  St.  John,  ii.  267-8 

Gardiner  (or  Sandwich),William,  canon 
of  Canterbury,  ii.  365,  367-71, 
379,  392,  397-400 

Garenter,  Thomas,  heretic,  i.  151,  152, 
154 

Garrard  (or  Garret),  Thomas,  his  escape 
from  Oxford,  i.  414  ;  ii.  208,  231, 
256 
burnt  in  Smithfield,  ii.  289,  381 

Gascoigne,  Dr.,  Chancellor    of   Oxford 
University,  i.  203,  228-34,   243-6 
his  Theological  Dictionary,  i.  246-65, 
573  71. 

Gasquet,  Abbot,  i.  Ill 

Geneva,  exiles  for  religion  at,  i.  331 


492    LOLLARDY  AND  THE   REFORMATION 


Germany,  embassy  from,  for  religious 

agreement,  ii.  168,  178-9 
Ghinucci,  Jerome,  Bishop  of  Worcester 

(1523-34),  ii.  13  n. 
Gigges,  Margaret,  nun  of  Blackborough, 

ii.  99 
Gilbert,     John,    Bishop     of    Hereford 

(1375-89)  ;  Bishop  of  St.  David's 

(1389-97),  i.  37 
Gilbert,  Robert,  D.D.,  i.  90 
Ginsburg,    Dr.,    on    the    printing    of 

Coverdale's    Bible,    ii.    271,    274, 

276  n. 
Glastonbury,  Abbot  of  (Richard  Whit- 
ing, executed  in  1539),  i.  342  ;  ii. 

211 
Gloucester,  bishopric  created,  ii.  212 
Gloucester,   Bishop    of.      See   Hooper, 

John  (1550-53) 
Gloucester  diocese.  Hooper's  visitation 

of,  i.  321 
Gloucester,  friars  at,  ii.  161 
Gloucester,  Humphrey,  Duke  of,  i.  Ill, 

140-1,  143,  154-6,  159,  160,  203, 

228,  264,  337,  537 
Gloucester,     Thomas     of     Woodstock, 

Duke  of,  i.  110 
Goderick,  Dr.  Henry,  ii.  341 
Godstow    nunnery,   beside    Oxford,   ii. 

210 
Gold,  George,  i.  481  n.,  485-6,  489 
Goldwell,  James,  Bishop    of   Norwich 

(1472-99),  ii.  102 
Goldwell,  Mr.,  ii.  341 
Goldwell,  Nicholas,  Archdeacon  of  Nor- 
wich, ii.  100 
Goodall,  John,  ii.  340 
Goodrich,     Thomas,    Bishop     of     Ely 

(1534-54),  ii.  195,  298,  307,  321, 

327 
Goodwin  Sands.    See  Tenterden  Steeple 
Gostvdck,  John  (afterwards  Sir  John), 

i.  468  ;  ii.  413-15,  418,  422 
Gracedieu,  Leicester,  nunnery  of,  ii.  92, 

115 
Grafton,  Richard,  the  printer,  ii.  201-2, 

282-6,  290-3 
Granvelle,   Minister  of  Charles  V.,   i. 

313  ;  ii.  276,  347-9,  366 
Gray,  William,  ballad-maker,   ii.  171, 

285,  290 
Graye,  John,  canon  of  Coxford,  ii.  101 
Great  Master,  My  Lord.      See  St.  John 
Greek  Church,  i.  164,  166 

terms  of  union   with  Latin  Church 

agreed  to  at  Florence,  i.  167 
Greene,  Thomas,  Carthusian,  ii.  38,  39 
Greenewode,   William,   Carthusian,   ii. 
38,  39 


Greenfield,  Mr.,  of  Buckinghamshire, 
ii.  58 

Greenwich,  Observant  Friars  of,  ii.  49, 
50 

Gregory  XL,  Pope,  i.  10 

Grey,  Agnes,  ii.  99 

Grey,  Lady  Jane,  i.  321 

Grey,  William,  Bishop  of  London 
(1426-31),  i.  151 

Grey  of  Wilton,  William,  Lord,  ii.  138 

Greyndor,  Henry,  a  follower  of  Old- 
castle,  i.  94 

Grimwood  (or  Grymward)  of  Hitcham, 
strange  story  of,  i.  343-56 

Grimwood  of  Lawshall,  i.  345 

Gueldres,  Duchy  of,  ii.  187 

Gueldres,  Charles,  Duke  of,  ii.  183 

Guernsey  martyrs,  i.  363 

Guilliam,  Sir,  a  priest,  ii.  428 

Gwent,  Richard,  Archdeacon  of  London, 
i.  36  ;  ii.  397 

Hadlam,  JoTin,  tailor,  martyr,  ii.  449, 

454,  466 
Hailes,  "the  Blood  of,"  ii.  127,  142-5, 

173 
Stephen  Sagar,  Abbot  of,  ii.  143 
Hale,  John,  martyr,  i.  431-3  ;  ii.  6 
Hales,  Sir  Christopher,  ii.  408 
Hall,   Edward,  the  Chronicler,  i.  441, 

443  ;  ii.   199,  201-2,  205,  232-4, 

236,  238,  242,  244,  247,  260,  390 
Hallom's  attempt  on  Hull,  ii.  34 
Hampton.      See  Southampton 
Hampton    Court,   French   Ambassador 

at,  ii.  463 
Harbottle,  Matthew,  i.  356 
Harding,  Thomas,  his  controversy  with 

Jewel,  i.  363 
Hare,  Nicholas,  of  Coxford,  ii.  100 
Harleston,  John,  monk  of  Wymondham, 

ii.  97 
Harman,  Edmund,  ii.  404,  407 

his  wife  Agnes,  ii.,  407 
Harman,  Richard,  of  Antwerp,  ii.  231 
Harpsfleld,   Dr.  Nicholas,  his  Dialogi 

Sex,  edited  bj'  Alau  Cope,  i.  358-63 
his  Pretended  Divorce,  ii.  193  n. 
Harridaunce  (or  Henry  Daunce),  John, 

the  bricklayer,  ii.  208-9 
Hart    (or    Lyard),    Walter,   Bishop   of 

Norwich  (1446-72),  i.  203,  229 
Harvey,  William,  of  Tenterden,  i.  147 
Haynes,  Dr.  Simon,  Dean  of  Exeter,  ii. 

377-8,  384-5,  440 
Heath,  Nicholas,  Bishop  of  Worcester 

(1543-51),  i.   320;   ii.   176,   315, 

352-3,  422,  432-3,  437,  442,  450, 

465 


INDEX 


493 


Hedgerley  (Heggeley),  Robert,  vicar  of, 

i.  146 
Held,   Matthias,  Imperial  Ambassador 

at  Schmalkalden,  ii.  319 
Helmsley    (Hemley,    or    Hemmysley), 

priest,  Protestant  martyr,  ii.  454 
Hengham,  John,  a  monk  of  Wymond- 

ham,  ii.  97 
Henley,  Walter,  Solicitor  of  the  Aug- 
mentations, ii.  122-3 
Henmersh,  John,  vicar  of  Puddington, 

Bedfordshire,  ii.  140 
Henry  VII.,  Emperor,  i.  9 
Henry   IV.,    King    (1399-1413).       As 
Earl  of  Derby  (1380-99),  i.  31,  36 
as  King,  i.  47,  56,  66,  70-71,   144, 
260 
Henry  V.,  King  (1413-22).     As  Prince 
of  Wales,  i.  56,  67 
as  King,  ii.  72-75,  78-86,  125,  135, 
144, 186-7,  254,  262,  557,  575 
Henry  VI.,  King  (1422-61  and  1470), 
i.   110,  111,  143,   145,   162,  187, 
246,  253,  254,  263 
Henry  VII.,  King  (1485-1509),  i.  110, 
263-5,  268,  273-5,  280,  298,  385; 
ii.  62 
Henry  VIII.,   i.    275,   276,    278,  298, 
326,  328  ;  ii.  (passim) 
his    original    devotion    to    Rome,    i. 

289,  290 
his  bad  repute  in  Europe,  i.  304 
did  not  pretend  to  alter  the  faith,  i. 

305 
his  feeling  about  different  books  of 

Tyndale,  i.  379 
his  divorce,  i.  278,  328,  376-8,  381-6 
his  marriage  to  Anne  Boleyu,  i.  420, 
503-4  ;    ii.    61,   62.      See  Boleyn, 
Anne 
his  Court,  i.  437.1 
brings  the  clergy  to   submission,  i. 

450.     See  Submission 
his     marriage     with     Katharine    of 

Aragon  pronounced  valid,  i.  462 
his  extraordinary  power,  ii.  44-6 
,  his  theology,  ii.  188,  195 
his  alarm,  ii.  190-1 
his  relations  with  the  Lutherans,  ii. 

175,  192,  213-17 
his   marriage  to,  and  divorce  from, 

Anne  of  Cleves,  ii.  215-17 
encourages    heretical    literature,    ii. 

239 
Luther  calls  him   "Squire   Harry," 

ii.  289 
his    book    against    the    Council    at 

Mantua,  ii.  177,  331 
corrects  "  the  Bishops'  Book, "  ii.  331 


his   orthodoxy  governed   by   policy, 

ii.  412 
his  speech  to  Parliament,  December 

1545,  ii.  423-6 
his  marriage  with  Katharine  Parr,  ii. 

583 
his  death,  ii.  465 

results  as  regards  religion  under  him, 
ii.  467  sq. 
Herbert,  Lady,  sister  of  Katharine  Parr, 

ii.  456 

Hereford,  Nicholas  of,  i.  21,  22,  24-7,  59 

Hereford,  Bishops  of  (John  Treffuant, 

1389-1404),  i.  33,  34,  36-40.     See 

Gilbert,    John   (1375-89)  ;    Foxe, 

Edward  (1535-8);  Bonner,  Edmund 

(1538-9)  ;  Skipp,  John  (1539-52) 

Heresy,  revived  under  Henry  VIII.,  i. 275 

rarity  of  prosecutions,  i.  276,  366 
Heretical  books,  proclamation  against, 

ii.  461 
Heretics.     See  More,  Sir  Thomas 
act  for  the  burning  of,  i.  48 
Gascoigne's  opinion  of,  i.  254 
Hertford,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172 
Hertford,  Earl  of  (Edward   Seymour), 
ii.  422 
his  countess,  ii.  452 
Hesse,  Philip  Landgiave   of,  ii.  176-7, 
186,  188,  192,  216,  259,  315,  319 
Hewet,   Andrew,  burnt  in  Smithfield, 

i.  405,  419 
Hewick  (or  Huick),  Dr.  William,  and 

his  wife,  ii.  441,  443-6 
Hey  wood,  John,  ii.  411,  412 
Hickling,  Norfolk,  monastery,  ii.  96 
Higden's  Polychronicon,  i.  211 
Higham,  Sir  Clement,  i.  345 
Hilles,  Richard,  ii.  436 
Hilman,  Thomas,  i.  25 
Hilsey,    John,    Bishop    of    Rochester 
(1535-9),  ii.  29,  47,  48,  124,  126. 
129,  131,  141-3,  160,  195,  327 
Hilton,  Sir  Reginald,  i.  41 
Hinton,     Somerset,     Prior     of.       See 

Horde,  Dr. 
Hitton,  Thomas,  heretic,  i.  531-4 
Hobbes,  Robert,  last  Abbot  of  Wobum, 

ii.  133-40 
Hoberd,  Agnes,  of  Wymondham,  ii.  97 
Hoby  (or  Hobby),  Sir  Philip,  ii.  377, 
402,  404,  406 
Elizabeth  Compton,  his  wife,  ii.  404, 
407 
Hoker,  John,  of  Jlaidstone,  ii.  124 
Holbeche,  Henry,  Prior  of  Worcester, 

ii.  145 
Holbeche    (or   Chapel),  a  chaplain   of 
Oldcastle's,  i.  125 


494    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Holbein,  the  painter,  ii.  223 

Hollius,  Margaret,  nuu  of  Black- 
borough,  ii.  99 

Holm  Cultrani,  Cumberland,  relic  at, 
ii.  115 
surrender  of  monastery,  ih. 

Holme,  Richard,  friar,  i.  173 

Holt,  John,  Titular  Bishop  of  Lydda, 
Abbot  of  Wymondham,  ii.  98 

Holt,  William,  i.  415 

Hooper,  John,  Bishop  of  Gloucester 
(1550-3),  and  of  Worcester 
(1552-3),  i.  320-1 

Hoper,  ,  a  servant  of  Oldcastle,  i. 

151 

Horde,  Dr.,  Prior  of  Hintou,  Somerset 
(Carthusian),  ii.  13,  20 

Horn,  William  (Carthusian),  ii.  38 

Horsey,  Dr.,  Chancellor  to  the  Bishop 
of  London,  i.  279 

Horwod,  John,  monk  of  Winchcombe, 
called  Placet  or  Placidus,  ii.  64-6, 
68  n. 

Houghton,  John,  Prior  of  the  Loudon 
Charterhouse,  martyr,  i.  421-9, 
435-7;  ii.  5,  7,  8,  10,  17-19,  21, 
22,  33 

Hounden  (or  Hunden),  Richard,  burnt, 
i.  159,  161 

Howard,  Queen  Katharine,  ii.  290, 
350 

Huchyn.      See  Tyudale,  W. 

Huick.     See  Hewick 

Huiskin  (Hausschein).  See  (Ecolani- 
padius 

Hull  Charterhouse,  ii.  30-34 

Hulme,  St.  Benet's,  abbey,  ii.  104 

Humerston,  Justice  of  the  Peace,  i.  351 

Hungary,  i.  256-7 

Hungerford,  Walter,  Lord,  Lord  Treas- 
urer, i.  134 

Hunne,  Richard,  i.  111-13,  278,  282, 
309,  310,  512,  574  ;  ii.  227 

Hunniades,  John,  Governor  of  Hun- 
gary, i.  256 

Huntington  (John),  a  priest,  ii.  428 

Hus,     John,    the    Bohemian    martyr, 
i.  88,  102,  111,  118,   120-3,  337, 
574 
his   followers   in    Bohemia,    i.    143, 
161-3  (see  Bohemia) 

Husee,  John,  correspondent  of  Lord 
Lisle,  i.  465  n.  ;  ii.  Ill,  124,  127, 
167,  194-5,  320  n. 

Hussey,  Archbishop  Cranmer's  regis- 
trar, ii.  394-6 

Hussey,  Lord,  ii.  15 

Hwyskyn  (Hausschein).  See  CEco- 
lampadius 


Hyde,  near  Winchester,  Abbot  of.    Sec 
Salcot,  John 

Idols  and  images,  ii,  371 

Images,  i.  317;    ii.  334,   360-4,  370. 

See  Idols 
Incent,  John,  Dr.,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's 

(1540),  ii.  382  n. 
Indulgences,  i,  256,  289 
Ingeam,  Vincent,  of  Sandwich,  ii,  392 
Ingworth,    Richard,    Suffragan   Bishop 

of  Dover,  ii.  160-2 
Innocent  111.,  Pope,  i.  53 
Innocent  VIII,,  Pope,  1,  269,  273,  279, 

280 
Inolde  (or  Enold),  Curate  of  Rye,  ii, 

332-3 
"Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,"  the 

(called    "The    Bishops'    Book"), 

ii.  108,   279,  305,    323,    328-32, 

337,  345,  352,   355-6,   359,  370, 

372,  375,  475 
Ipswich,   Our   Lady  of,    i.   555,  561  ; 

ii.  149,  150,  172 
Grey  Friars  of,  ii.  160 
Ireland,  John,  of  Eltham,  ii.  411,  412 
Ireland,  Church  of,  ii.  469 

chieftains    of,    renounce    the    Pope, 

ii.  473 

Jacopo,  a  nuncio,  i.  148 

James    IV.    of    Scotland,    his   widow 

Margaret,  i.  381 
James  V.  of  Scotland,  ii.  151 
James,  William,  Lollard,  abjures,  i.  126 
Jaye.     See  Joye 

Jerome  of  Prague,  i.  118, 120, 122,  123 
Jerome,  William,  burnt  in  Smithfield, 

ii.  289,  381 
Jervaux,  monastery  of,  i,  247 
Jessopp,    Dr.,    his     Visitations  of  the 

Diocese  of  Norwich,  ii,  106 
Jewel,  Bishop,  i.  363 
Joan  of  Navarre,  Queen  of  Henry  IV., 

i.  558 
John    of   Gaunt,    Duke    of   Lancaster, 

i.   13,  21,    22,   31,  32,  34  n.,  36, 

40,  63 
John  III,  of  Portugal,  i.  294 
Johnson,  John,  merchant,  ii,  465 
Johnson,  Otwell,  letter  of,  ii,  465 
Johnson,  Thomas  (Carthusian),  ii,  38, 39 
John  XXII,,  Pope,  i.  9,  13,  33  n.,  257, 

260 
John  XXIII,,  Pope,  i,  66,  103,  119 
John  Palseologus  II.,  Emperor,  i.  167 
Jonas,  Justus,  the  German  Reformer, 

ii.  316 
Jourdelay,  John,  heretic,  i.  145 


INDEX 


495 


Joye   (Jaye,    or    Clarke),    George,    a 
heretic,  i.  406  ;  ii.  234,  241-2 
writings  of,  i.  527,  531,  540 
Jubilee,  i.  256,  259 
Julius  II.,  Pope,  i.  385 
Justification,  ii.  323,  325,  353,  355 

Katharine,  Queen  of  Henry  V.,  mother 

of  Henry  VI.,  i.  145 
Katharine  of  Aragon,  Queen  of  Henry 

VIII.,   i.   278,    292-3,   303,   304, 

311-12,  328,  376,  378,  382-5,  420, 

438,  444,  450-3,  456,   462,  467, 

482;    ii.   3,  5,   107,   146-7,   182, 

224,  347 
Kelke,  Mr.,  i.  349 
Kemp,    John,     Archbishop    of    York 

(1426-51),  Lord  Chancellor,  i.  134, 

142 
Ketterich,  John,  Bishop   of  Coventry 

and  Lichfield  (1415-19),  i.  89 
King,  Robert,  of  Dedham,  i.  338-9 
"King's  Book,"  the.     .See  "Necessary 

Doctrine  " 
Kingston  [upon  Thames  ?],  a  place  of 

pilgrimage,  ii.  172 
Kingston,    Sir    William,    Constable   of 

the  Tower,  i.  498-9 
Kitchin,  Anthony,  Bishop  of  Llandaif 

(1545-66),  i.  332 
Kitson,  Sir  Thomas,  Sheriff  of  London, 

i.  423  ;  ii.  21,  49 
Knighton's  Chronicle,  i.  101,  103,  108, 

109 
Knox,  John,  the  Reformer,  i.  333 
Kny  vet,  Sir  Anthony,  Lieutenant  of  the 

Tower  (1546),  ii.  453-4 
Knyvet,  Sir  Henry,  ii.  348-9,  350  n. 
Kyme,    Thomas,    husband     of     Anne 

Askew,  ii.  426,  446 
Kyrteling,   John,  Abbot  of  Wymond- 

ham,  ii.  96 

Lache,  a  monk  of  Sion,  ii.  26,  28 
Ladislaus,  King  of  Naples,  i.  121 
Lambert  (or   Nicholson),  John,  burnt 

in    Smithfield,    i.    341,    398  ;    ii. 

164-8,  335,  381 
Lambert,  Francis  (Serranus),  friar,  i.  578 
Lambeth,  Conference  at,  ii.  35 
Lancaster,  Duke  of.    See  John  of  Gaunt 
Lane,  Lady,  ii.  456 
Langdon,  Dr.  John,  i.  127,  128 
Langland,    William,    author    of    Piers 

Plowman,  i.  107 
Larke,  John,  of  Chelsea,  ii.  411,  412 
Lascelles,    John,    Protestant     martyr, 

ii.  441,  443-5,  454 
Lateran,  Council  of  (in  1215),  i.  32,  53 


Latimer,  John  Nevill,  third  Lord 
(ob.  1542),  ii.  383 

Latimer,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Worcester 
(1535-9),  i.  307,  314,  394-5,  398, 
400,  403-5,  427,  464  ;  ii.  35,  62, 
63,  82,  83,  85,  88-91,  129,  144-5, 
148-50,  195,  206-8,  213,  222,  223, 
261,  263,  282,  307,  309,  321,  324, 
339,  441-5,  449 

Latimer,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  40 

Laurence,  Robert,  Carthusian  martyr, 
Prior  of  Beauvale,  i.  426,  435-7 

Lawney,  Thomas,  jest  of,  ii.  269 

Lawson,  George,  ii.  252 

Lay,  John,  a  chaplain  of  Oldcastle's, 
i.  70 

Layton,  Richard,  i.  482  ;  ii.  28,  29, 
31,  53,  57,  58,  65,  72-80,  92, 
114-22,  133,  144 

Lee,  Edward,  Archbishop  of  York 
(1531-44),  i.  509  n.  ;  ii.  12,  13, 
30,  35,  51,  74,  75,  195,  306-7, 
321,  323,  327 

Lee,  Roland,  Bishop  of  Coventry  and 
Lichfield  (1534-43),  i.  423,  452  n., 
467;  ii.  20,  21,  23,  48-51,  65,307 

Legh  (or  Lee),  Dr.  Thomas,  i.  482  ; 
ii.  31,53-8,60-62,  71-80,  92,  113- 
115,  133-4,  395-6 

Leicester,  Parliament  at  (1414),  i.  83 
Abbey,  ii.  79 

Leighton,  Dr.  Edward,  ii.  299  n. 

Leominster  Priory,  scandal  at,  i.  557 
pilgrimage  to,  ii.  172 

L'Estrange  (Le  Straunge),  Sir  Thomas, 
ii.  116-17 

Lewes  Priory,  ii.  108-11,  121 

Lewis  of  Bavaria,  Emperor,  i.  9 

Leyson,  Sheriff,  i.  356 

Lichfield,  ii.  74 

Shrine  of  St.  Chad,  ii.  114 

Lighani,  Dr.,  Dean  of  the  Arches, 
i.  438 

Lincoln,  Bishop  of.  See  Bokyngham, 
John  (1363-98);  Repingdou, 
Philip  (1404-20);  Fleming, 
Richard  (1420-31)  ;  Longland, 
John  (1520-47) 

Lincoln  Cathedral,  ii.  426 

Lincoln,  observances  at,  i.  126 

Lincolnshire  rebellion,  ii.  85,  93,  107, 
317-18,  320 

Lipan,  battle  of  (1434),  i.  165 

Lisle,  Arthur,   Lord,  Deputy  of  Calais 
(ob.    1542),    i.   465   n.  ;    ii.    Ill, 
124,  127,  167,  194,  320  n.,  342 
Lady,  ii.  127 
John,  Lord.     See  Dudley 

Lithuania,  i.  186 


496  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Uandaff,    Bishop    of.      See  Athequa, 

George  (1516-34  ?)  ;    Kitchin,  A. 

(1545-66) 
Lodovico,  a  banker,  ii.  349 
Lollards,  teaching  of  the,  i.  7,  41 
their  designs  and  activity,  i.  42 
their  Twelve  Conclusions,  i.  43-46 
under  Henry  IV.,  i.  47,  48,  52,  61, 

66,  67 
under  Henry  V.,  i.  74,  84,  125 
ballad  against  them,  i.  87 
later   they   are    known    as   the    lay 

party,  i.  118,  201 
a  pause  in  persecutions  of  them  (in 

1431),  i.  161,  162 

Pecock  writes  against  them,  i.  202  sq. 

character  of,  i.  222.    See  also  Heresy 

Lollards'  Tower.    See  London,  St.  Paul's 

Lollardy  stimulated  anew  byTyndale's 

New  Testament,  i.  366 
becomes    "  the    New    Learning,"    i. 

314  ;  ii.  109 
London — 

All  Hallows  Barking,  i.  488 
Austin  Friars,  Croniwell'a  house  at, 

ii.  255  ;  Dutch  church  at,  ii.  272-3 
Baynard's  Castle,  i.  283 
Bethlehem    Hospital,    marriages    at, 

ii.  352 
Black  friars,  i.  282 
Counter,  the  (prison),  ii.  427,  452 
Fleet  prison,  the,  ii.  377 
Grey  Friars,  Warden  of,  ii.  162 
Guildhall,  ii.  430,  449,  462 
Mercers'  Chapel,  the,  ii.  199,   202, 

435-6,  439 
Newgate    prison,    ii.    37,    38,    148, 

300,  446,  449,  450,  453,  462 
Paul's  Cross,  i.    113,   223,   229-31, 

263,   282,  326,  394,  562  ;  ii.  29, 

30,   91,  124,   126,   141,  148,  227, 

235,  380,  436-7,  461 
Sadlers'  Hall,  ii.  427 
Smithfield,  burnings    in,    i.   51,   67, 

88,  276,   362,  398,  403  ;  ii.  148, 

150,  168,  174,  217,  289,454,  461 
St.  Anthony's,  i.  249 
St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital,  ii.  149, 

454 
St.  Magnus'  Church,  i.  393 
St.   Margaret  Pattens,  rood  broken, 

ii.  149 
St.  Paul's,  ii.  133,  164,  299 

Dean  of.     See  May,  Dr.  William 

Lollards'  Tower  in,  i.  278-9 
St.     Paul's     Churchyard,     i.    307  ; 

ii.  237-8,  260 
Temple,  i.  494 
Tower.     See  Alphabetical 


London,  Bishops  of.  See  Braybrooke, 
Robert  de  (1381-1404)  ;  Clifford, 
Richard  (1407-21)  ;  Grey,  William 
(1426-31);  FitzJames,  Richard 
(1506-22)  ;  Tuustall,  Cuthbert 
(1522-30) ;  Stokesley,  John  (1530- 
1539);  Bonner,  Edmund  (1539- 
1549and  1553-9);  Ridley,  Nicholas 
(1550-3) 

London,  Dr.  John,  Warden  of  New 
College,  Oxford,  ii.  162,  210-11, 
375-6,  378-9,  384-6,  393,  400, 
405 

London,  Stephen,  Prior  and  Abbot  of 
Wymondham,  ii.  98 

Longland,  John,  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
(1520-47),  i.  376,  387,  409;  ii. 
321,  327 

Lords,  House  of,  under  the  Tudors,  i. 
297 

Lord's  Prayer  [Paternoster),  ii.  323, 
330,  334,  392 

Louis  XI.  of  France,  i.  381 

Louis  XII.  of  France,  i.  292,  381 

Louthe's  NaiTative.  ii.  426  n. 

Lowe,  John,  friar,  i.  157 

Luft,  Hans,  German  printer,  ii.  238, 
259 

Luniley,  Marmaduke,  Bishop  of  Carlisle 
(1430-50),  i.  229 

Luther,    personal    references,    i.    337, 
417;  ii.  165,  227,  289,  316 
his  New  Testament,  ii.  227 
Luther    and    Lutlieranism,    i.    278, 
289,  290,  311,  394,  408,  509,  510, 
515,   526,  566-7,  569,  572-8  ;  ii. 
5,   184,  190,  228,   231,  253,  256, 
310,  312-16,  325,  349,  478 
Lutherans  of  Germany,  Henry  VIII.'s 
relations  with  the,   ii.    175,   192, 
213-17,  346,  366.     See  also  Pro- 
testants 

Lyard.     See  Hart 

Lyndewode,  William,  LL.D.,  i.  90 

Lyst,  Richard,  friar,  ii.  146 

Madeleine,  first  Queen  of  James  V.  of 

Scotland,  ii.  151 
Mainz,  Diet  at,  i.  167,  168 
Maitlanii,     Dr.    S.    R.,    the    Lambeth 

librarian,  ii.  200 
Majoris,  Dean  of  Canibray,  ii.  190 
Malvern, ,  physician  to  Archbishop 

Arundel,  i.  57 
Man,  Henry,  Prior  of  Sheen,  i.  26,  27, 

40 
Mandeville,  Sir  John,  i.  107 
Mantua,  Council  summoned  to   ii.  136, 

177,  319 


INDEX 


497 


Mantua,  Duke  of,  ii.  319 

Marbeck    (Morback,    etc.),   John,   the 

musician,    i.    344,    358-9,    377-8, 

384,  386-7,  393 
Marburg,  a  fictitious  date,  ii.  258-9 
Margaret,  sister  of  Henry  VIII. ,  widow 

of  James  IV.  of  Scotland,  i.  381 
Marham,  Abbess  of,  ii.  105 
Marillac,  French  Ambassador,  ii.  191, 

192,  194,  204,  205,  224,  286,  288, 

293 
Marler,  Anthony,  licensed  to  sell  bibles, 

ii.  292-3,  298 
Marot,  Clement,  French  poet,  ii.  378 
Marriage  held  superfluous,  i.  274 
Marriage  of  the  clergy,  i.  329 
Marsh,  Nicholas,  of  Dedham,  i.  358-9 
Marshall,  William,  ii.  15 

his  Defence  of  Peace,  ii.  15,  33 
Marshalsea  prison,  ii.  11,  377,  403 
Marsiglio  of  Padua,  i.  9,  13 
Martin  V.,  Pope,  i.  119,  135, 143,  163, 

166,  168 
his  censure  of  Archbishop  Chichele 

and  the    English  Government,   i. 

135-40,  262 
Mary,    sister    of    Henry    VIII.,    her 

marriage  to  Charles  Brandon,  i. 

381 
Mary,  Queen,  daughter  of  Henry  VIII., 

as  princess,  ii.  4,  5,  180,  184-5 
her  brutal  treatment  by  her  father, 

i.  311-13 
her  accession,  i.  321,  329,  330 
her  task  as  Queen,  i.  322-3 
her  marriage  to  Philip,  i.  324-7 
the  persecution  under,  ii.  209 
Mary,    Queen   of  Hungary,   Regent  of 

the  Netherlands,  ii.  42,  189 
Mary  of  Guise,  ii.  185 
Mary  Rose,  the,  foundering  of,  ii.  419 
Mass,  the,  turned  into  a  communion, 

i.  321 
masses,  private,  ii.  179 
Master,  Richard,  parson  of  Aldington, 

i.  461 
Mathew,  John,   Prior  of  Coxford,  ii. 

100 
Matrimony,  ii.  179 
Maundevyle,    William.       See    Sharpe, 

Jack 
Mawde,  Robert,  ii.  339 
May,  Dr.  William,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's, 

ii.  437 
Maydwell,  John,  the  Scottish  friar,  ii. 

16 
Meaux,  Yorkshire,  relics  at,  ii.  115 
Mekins,  a  boy  burnt  under  the  Act  of 

the  Six  Articles,  i.  315 

VOL.   II 


Melancthon,  i.  395  ;    ii.   178-80,   207, 
290,  314,  316-18,  322 

Merton  Abbey,  ii.  72 

Metereu  (or  Demetrius),  Emanuel  van, 
ii.  271-3 

Meteren,  Jacob  van,  his  aid  to  Cover- 
dale,  ii.  272-5 

Middlemore,    Humphrey,     Carthusian 
martyr,  i.  422  ;  ii.  8,  10-12 

Milan.      See  Sforza 

Milan,  Christina,  Duchess  of,  ii.   185, 
189,  223-4 

Milgate,  John,  Prior  of  Buckenham,  ii. 
101 

Milles,  prebendary,  ii.  373-4,  400 

Millington,  Dr.,  i.  230 

Mitchel,  John,  Prior  of  Witham  (Car- 
thusian), ii.  40 

Moddis,  Edmund,  Henry  VIII.'s  foot- 
man, i.  520 

Moens,  W.  J.  C. ,  editor  of  the  Register 
of  the  Dutch  Church,  ii.  272 

Moleyns,  Adam    de,    Bishop    of    Chi- 
chester (1445-50),  i.  228-30 

Monasteries,  suppression  of  the,  ii.  31 
their  moral  condition,  ii.  95  sq. 
those  suppressed  by  Wolsey,  ii.  94 

Monk,  Richard,  vicar  of  Chesham,   i. 
149,  151,  152,  154 

Monmouth,       Humphrey,      Tyndale's 
patron,  ii.  227,  235 

Mont,  Christopher,  ii.  178,  184-6,  188 

Montague,  Henry  Pole,  Lord,  ii.  157-8, 
181 

Montague,  Sir  John,  i.  41 

Montmorency,  the  Constable,  ii.  204, 
205 

Montreuil,  Madame  de,  ii.  131 

Moore,  Master,  ii.  249,  252,  254 

Morback  and  Morbecke.     See  Marbeck 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  304,  307-11,  386- 
389,  414-15,  421,  425,  437-8,  447, 
454,  456-60,  463-7,  469-79,  481- 
484,  487,  489-504  ;  ii.  4,  6,  52,  53, 
98,  134,  136-7,  147,  202,  228, 
232-4,  236-7,  241-2,  254,  412 
commissioned  by  Bishop  Tuustall  to 

answer  Lutheran  books,  i.  510 
resigns  the  Chancellorship,  i.  506 
his  writings,  i.  505,  578  ;  ii.  3,  252 
his  ideas,  i.  506-7 
his  feeling  about  heretics,    i.    535, 

567-9 
he  vindicates  the  burning  of  them, 

i.  575 
writes  against  Tyndale,  i.  368,  371, 

375,  536 
his  Supplication  of  Souls,  i.  522-4 
his  Apology,  i.  276-8,  536,  539 

2k 


498    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


his  Answer  to  The   Siqiper  of  the 

Lord,  i.  540 
his  Dialogue,  i.  104-6,  111-13,  399- 
402  ;  briefly  described,  i.  510-17 ; 
abstract  of,  543-78  ;  ii.  478 
Tyudale's  Answer  to  it,  i.  524,  528 
his  Confutation  of  the  Ansxoer,   i, 

525-36  ;  ii.  237 
his  Dialogue  of  Comfort,  i.  471,  541 
his  treatise  ou  The  Passion  of  Christ, 

i.  541 
his  treatise.  How  to  receive  the  Body 

of  our  Lord,  i.  541 
his   Debellacyon  of  Salem  and   Bi- 

zance,  i.  539 
his  Answer  to  Frith,  i.  415,  539 
his  wife,  i.  471 

his  daughter.     See  Roper,  Margaret 
his  household,  ii.  40 
More,  William,  Prior  of  Worcester,  ii. 

61 
Mores,  surveyor  of  the  lands  of  Sion, 

ii.  25 
Morice,    Ralph,    Cranmer's    secretary, 
ii.    196,    269,    407-9,    413,    419, 
463 
Morison,  Sir  Richard,  ii.  112  n. 
Morley,  Lord,  ii.  422 
Morone      John,     nuncio     (afterwards 

Cardinal),  ii.  347,  349 
Morres,  William,  ii.  445 
Morton,   John,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury   (1486-1500),     Cardinal,     i. 
268-73,  275  ;  ii.  99 
Mountgrace,  Yorkshire,   Prior  of  (Car- 
thusian), ii.  13,  30,  31 
Moyle,  Sir  Thomas,  ii.  408 
Muchelney  Abbey,  Somerset,  ii.  115 
Mungyn,  Ralph,  heretic,  i.  148-54 
Miisard,  John,  monk  of  Worcester,  ii. 

61,  63 
Myconius,  Frederic,  ii.  178,  179 
Mylward,  John,  of  Toddington,  ii.  136 
his  book,  de  I'otestate  Petri,  ii.  136 

"  Necessary     Doctrine "     (the     King's 
Book),  ii.  305,  354-6,  357,  360-2, 
366,    372,    375,    381,    383,    433, 
475-6 
Neckham,  Dr.  Roger,  monk  of  Worce- 
ster, ii.  63 
Necromancers,  i.  125 
Necton,  Richard  (Robert),  ii.  237 
Netter,  Thomas,  of  Walden,  Carmelite 
Friar,  i.  129,  157,  255 
account  of  him,  i.  186-7 
his  Doctrinalc,  i.  188-98 
his  de  Sacravientis,  i.  198-9 
his  de  Sacramentalibus,  i.  199,  200 


Nevell,  William,  monk,  ii.  92 

Nevill,  George,  Bishop  of  Exeter  (1456- 

1465),  i.  232,  243-4 
Xevill,  Sir  William,  i,  40 
Nevill,  William,  canon  of  Coxford,  ii. 

99,  101 
Nevinson,       Christopher,       Cranmer's 

Commissary,     ii.      360-61,    364, 

372-4,  385,  392,  397 
Newburgh,  Yorkshire,  relics  at,  ii.  115 
Newdigate,       Sebastian,       Carthusian 

niartj%  ii.  8-12 
Newgate  prison.     See  London 
"New    Learning,"     the,    i.    314-16, 

328-9;   ii.    223,    226,    358,    364, 

367,  393,  422 
New  Testament.     See  Bible 
Nice,  a  ten  years'  truce  agreed  at,  ii. 

181 
Nicholas  V.,  Pope,  i.  170,  256-7,  259, 

260.  264 
Nicholson  (or  Lambert),   John,   burnt 

in  Smithfield.     See  Lambert  j 
Nicke    (or    Nix),   Richard,    Bishop    of 

Norwich  (1501-36),  i.  387  ;  ii.  97, 

103,  229-31,  238-40,  242 
Nightingale,   John,   Sub-prior  of  Cox- 
ford, ii.  100 
Norfolk,  Thomas  Howard,  third  Duke 

of,  i.  457,  465,  490;  ii.  4,  20,  21, 

34-6,   108-11,   195,    196   n.,   226, 

389,  418,  419,  421,  465 
Norfolk,  Thomas  Howard,  fourth  Duke 

of,  his   house   at   Creechurch   by 

Aldgate,  i.  350,  354-5 
Norris,  Henry,  executed  (1536) ;  ii.  224 
North,  Sir  Edward,  ii.  43 
Northampton,  St.  Andrew's  Priory,  ii. 

119,  132,  133 
Northumberland,       Duke       of.        See 

Dudley,  John 
Norwich,  Bishops  of.     See  Courtenay, 

Richard    (1413-15);    Alnewick, 

William  (1426-36)  ;  Hart,  Walter 

(1446  -  72) ;      Goldwell,      James 

(1472-99);  Nicke,  Richard  (1501- 

1536)  ;  Reppis,  William  (1536-50) 
Cathedral  Priory,  ii.  102 
Diocese,  ii.  78,  84 
Mayor  of  (Edward  Reed),  i.  401-3 
Prior  of,  i.  157 
Nuns,  treatment  of,  ii.  70.  71 
Nycolson,  James,  printer,  ii.  275 

Obizis,  Dr.  John  de,  nuncio,  i.  140 
Observant   Friars,   suppression   of  the 

Order,  ii.  51,  52 
Occleve,  his    poem  addressed   to  Old- 
castle,  i.  85-7 


INDEX 


499 


Ockam,  Robert,  ii.  401-3,  405-6 
Ockham,  William  of,  i.  9 
(Ecolampadius  (Hausschein,  or  "Hwy- 

skyn  ")  i.  408,  578 
Ogard,  Sir  Andrew,  ii.  97 
Oldcastle,  Sir  John,   Lord   Cobham,  i. 
69,  70,  72-4 
proceedings  against  him,  i.  75-8 
his  escape  from  the  Tower,  and  con- 
spiracy, i.  79-85 
poems  about  him,  i.  86-8 
active  again,  i.  94 
arrested,  i.  95 

his  sentence  and  execution,  i.  9G,  97 
mentioned,  i.  100,  162, 186, 189,  205, 

575  ;  ii.  339  n. 
Bale's  Brief  Chronicle  of,  i.  75 
Old  Learning  and  the  New,  ii,  358,  367 
Onley  (or  Bolingbroke),  Roger,  i.  337 
Oporinus,  Foxe's  publisher,  i.  333 
Orders,  sacrament  of,  ii.  179,  356 
Ordinal,  a  new,  i.  321 
Ordinaries,  answer  of,  to  the   "Suppli- 
cation," i.  302,  449 
Original  sin,  ii.  355 
Orleans,  Charles,  Duke  of  (ob.  1545), 

ii.  431 
Ortiz,    Dr.,    Imperial    Ambassador    at 

Rome,  ii.  71 
Osiander,  Andrew,  of  Nuremberg,  ii.  307 
Osmund,  Thomas,  monk  of  Wymond- 

ham,  ii.  98 
Otho,  Dan,  i.  578 
Otterden,  Nicholas,  ii.  454  ii. 
Overbury,    William,    monk  of  Winch- 
combe,  ii.  64,  66-8 
Oxford,   Archbishop    Arundel's    synod 
at,  i.  61,  71.  111.  574 
Friars  in,  ii.  162,  210 
Oxford,  bishopric  of,  ii.  212 
Oxford  University,  i.  26,  27,  55,   56, 
61,  65,  150  ;  ii.  212 
supports  Archbishop  Chichele,  i.  141 
books  given  to,  by  Tiptoft,  Earl  of 

Worcester,  i.  265 
appealed    to    about    Henry    VIII. 's 

divorce,  i.  295 
visited  by  Layton,  ii.  57 
All  Souls  College,  ii.  57 
Corpus  Christi  College,  ii.  57 
Magdalen  College,  ii.  57 
Merton  College,  ii.  57 
New  College,  ii.  57,  58 
Queen's  College,  ii.  57 
Owen,  Dr.,  ii.  458 
Owtrede,  Ralph,  i.  126 

Packington,  Augustine,  mercer,  ii.  232- 
235,  257-8 

VOL.   II 


Packington,  Robert,  murder  of,  ii.  382  n. 

Padua,  university  of,  i.  296 

Paget,  Sir  William,  secretary  to  Henry 

VIII.,  ii.  403,  431 
Parchmyner,  William,  an  adherent  of 

Oldcastle,  i.  93 
Pardon  to  heretical  courtiers,  ii.  393 
Pardon,  general,  statute  of,  ii.  410 
Paris,  a  Black  Friar,  i.  178,  179 
Paris,  John,  curate  at  Canterbury,  ii. 

660 
Parker,  Matthew,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, ii.  395 
Parkhurst,  Prebendary  of  Canterbury, 

ii.  399 
Parliament,  the  Good  (of  1376),  i.  10 
(of     1529),     Henry    VIII. 's     Long 
Parliament,  sometimes  called  "  the 
Reformation  Parliament,"  i.  297- 
304,  439,  440,  443,  449,  454 
Parpaglia,  abbot,  ii.  182 
Parr,  Katharine,  Queen  of  Henry  VIII., 

ii.  383,  451,  455-61 
Parr,  Sir  William,  uncle  of  Katharine 

Parr,  ii,  118 
"Parson,"      Sir      Thomas      (Anthony 

Peerson  ?),  ii.  377,  384 
Parsons,     Robert,     the     Jesuit,     his 
writings,  i.  340,  363  ;  ii.  198  n., 
451,454,  461 
his  imprinted  Certamen  Ecclesioe,  i. 
514  w. 
Partridge,  Nicholas,  ii.  125,  126 
Pate,  Richard,  Ambassador,  ii.  226 
Patensou,  Henry,  More's  fool,  i.  473 
Paternoster,  the.     See  Lord's  Prayer 
Patrick,  friar,  ii.  382  n. 
Patrington,  Stephen,  Carmelite  Friar, 
i.  27 
Bishop  of  St.  David's  (1415-17),  90, 
186 
Paul  III.,  Pope,  ii.  22,  431 
Paul  IV.,  Pope,  i.  330-1 
Paul's  Cross.     See  London 
Paulet,  Sir  William,  Controller  of  Henry 
VIII.'s  Household,  ii.  110  (after- 
wards Lord  St.  John,  q.v.) 
Payne  (or  Clarke),  Peter,  i.  150,  165, 

190 
Paynell,  Thomas,  ii.  185-6,  188 
Pecche,  Sir  John,  i.  40 
Peck,  Laurence.     See  Bloneham 
Peckham,  Archbishop,  i.  61 
Pecock,  Reginald,  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph 
(1444-50)  ;  Bishop  of  Chichester 
(1450-7),  i.  202,  227,  231-8,  255 
his   books,    The   Repressor,   i.    203, 
205-26,  b277;  The  Donet,  204; 
the  Follower  to  the  Donet,  204  ; 

2k2 


500    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


TheJust  Apprising  of  Doctors,  216  ; 

The  Just  Apprising  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, 216 
Friar  Bury's  answer  to  him,  1.  238 
Gascoigne's  account  of  him,  i.  228 
Peereson.     See  Pierson 
Peerson,  Anthony,  ii.  384-6,  404,  406. 

See  Parson,  Sir  Thomas 
Pellis,  Dr.,  Chancellor  of  the  Bishop 

of  Norwich,  i.  402 
Penrice,  in  Glamorganshire,  image  at, 

i.  149,  150,  172 
Pentney,  Norfolk,  Priory  of,  ii.  105 
Perkyns,  William.      See  Sharpe,  Jack 
Persons,    John,    of    Winchcombe,    ii. 

66  n. 
Peterborough,  bishopric  of,  ii.  212 
Peterson,  William,  ii.  128 
Peto,  friar,  ii.  46 
Petre,  Dr.  William,  secretary  to  Henry 

VIII.,  ii.  133,  139,  309,  440-2 
Philip  the  Fair,  King  of  France,  i.  9 
Philip  I.  of  Castile,  ii.  164  7i. 
Philip    II.    of    Spain    marries    Queen 

Mary,  i.  324-6 
thinks     he     can     reconcile     Queen 

Elizabeth  and  the  Holy  See,  i.  331 
Philippes,  Thomas,  a  heretic,  i.  410 
Philips,  Roland,  vicar  of  Croydon,   ii. 

12,  13 
Piccolomini,  Jilneas  Sylvius,  afterwards 

Pope  Pius  II.,  i.  169,  256 
Piers  Plo^oman,  i.  107  ;  ii.  334 
Pierson  (or  Peereson),  Walter,  Carthu- 
sian, ii.  38,  39 
Pilgram,  Nicholas  of,  Taborite  Bishop, 

i.  165 
Pilgrimages,  ii.  334 
Pisa,  Council  of,  i.  63,  119,  186 
Pius  II.,  Pope.    See  Piccolomini,  .^neas 

Sylvius 
Pius  v..  Pope,  i.  331 
"Placet"  or   "Placidus."      See  Hor- 

wood,  John 
Poland,  i.  286 
Pole,  Edmund,  de  la  (claimant  of  the 

Dukedom  of  Suffolk),  ii.  164  n. 
Pole,    Reginald,  Cardinal,  i.  314,  318, 

430,    436,  463,    468  ;  ii.   41,   42, 

107-8,    156-8,    181-3,    186,    308, 

310-11 
reconciles     England     to     Rome,     i. 

324-5,  329,  330 
Pole,    Sir    Geoffrey,    brother    of    the 

Cardinal,  ii.  157-8 
Polsted,  servant  of  Cromwell,  ii.  110 
Pomeranus.     See  Bugenhagen 
Pomfret,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  178 
meeting  of  clergy  at,  ii.  319 


Ponet,    John,    Bishop    of    Winchester 

(1551-3),  i.  320 
Pope,    the,   to    be   called    "  Bishop    of 

Rome,"  i.  303,  424 
ridiculed   in   a  farce   played  on  the 

Thames,  ii.  205-6 
erasing  of  his  name,  ii.  350-1 
Pope  [Sir],  Thomas,  i.  500-1  ;  ii.  465 
Porter,  John,  i.  315  ;  ii.  300-301 
Porter,  Robert,  ii.  100-101 
Portinari,    Giovanni,    an    Italian    en- 
gineer, ii.  111-12 
Potkyn,  William,  ii.  230 
Powell,  Dr.  Edward,  ii.  217,  289 
Powis,  Lord,  i.  96 

Powley,  ,  ii.  445 

Prcemunire,  statute  of,  i.  458 
Prcemunire  against  the  clergy,  i.  299, 

300,  388 
sued  by  Hunne,  i.  310 
Pragmatic  sanction  in   France,  i.  167, 

171 
Prague,  capital  of  Bohemia,  i.  120,  121 
heretics  of,  i.  145 
the  Four  Articles  of,  i.  165 
university  of,  i.  181 
Prague,  Jerome  of.     See  Jerome 
Praty,  Richard,   Bishop   of  Chichester 

(1438-45),  i,  246,  249 
Prayer  Book.     See  Common  Prayer 
Prayer  for  the  Dead,  ii.  353,  355 
Preaching  regulated  by  licences,  i.  61, 

71 
Prentes,  Simon,  ii.  80  n. 
Price,  David,   vicar -general   of  Bishop 

of  London,  i.  148,  149,  153 
Price,  Elis,  ii.  146 
Printing,   a   great    means    of   diffusing 

heresy,  i.  309  ;  ii.  478 
Prit,  parson  of  Hitcham,  i.  343 
Proclamations,  ii.  153 
Procopius,   Bohemian  general,   i.    144, 

165 
Protestants,     the     German,    ii.     421, 

430-2,  434.     .S^ee  also  Lutherans 
Provisors  and  praemunire,   statutes  of, 

i.  136-9,  142 
Punt,  William,  i.  346-50,  353-6 
Purgatory,  doctrine  of,  ii.  35,  64,  91, 

323,  325,  329,  435,  443 
Puritanism  and  Lollardy,  ii.  339,  481 
Purvey,    John,    Wyclifte's    disciple,    i. 

52,  59,  116,  195 
his    book    de    Com2Kndiis   Scripttcr- 

arum,  etc.,  i.  195 

Raby,  Father,  Carthusian,  ii.  18 
Ramsbury,    Wilts,    the    Rood   of,    ii. 
129  n. 


INDEX 


501 


Band,  ,  churchwarden  at  Canter- 
bury, ii.  360-1 

Rastell,  a  preacher,  ii.  12 

Rastell,  William,  More's  nephew,  i.  541 

Ratisbon,  Diet  of  (1541),  u.  325,  346, 
348-9 

Rawlens,  Prior  of  Coxford,  ii.  100-101 

Rawlyns,  Nicholas,  Carthusian,  ii.  17, 33 

Raynoldes,  John,  ii.  333 

Reading  Abbey,  ii.  74 

Abbot  of  (in  1428),  i.  142  ;  ii.  211 
Abbot  of  (Hugh  Cook,  executed  in 

1539),  i.  342 
Prior  of  (in  1530),  i.  414 
Child  of  Grace  at,  ii.  172 

Reed,  Edward,  Mayor  of  Norwich,  i. 
401-3 

Reedyng,  Thomas,  Carthusian,  ii.  38,  39 

Reformation,  the  English,  predisposing 
causes  of,  i.  3 
not  a  mere  theological  change,  i.  507 

Regnault,  Francis,  bookseller  in  Paris, 
ii.  286 

Repingdon,     Philip,     a     follower     of 
Wyclitfe,  i.  21,  23-7 
excommunicated,  i.  27. 
submits,  ib. 

becomes  Bishop  of  Lincoln  (1404-20), 
and  then  Cardinal,  i.  27,  59,  126 

Reppis,  Repps,  or  Rugge,  William, 
monk  of  Norwich,  afterwards 
Abbot  of  St.  Benet's  Hulme,  and 
later  (1536-50)  Bishop  of  Norwich, 
ii.  103,  104,  195,  307,  321 

Repton,  Derbyshire,  St.  Guthlac's  bell 
at,  ii.  114 

Revival  of  letters,  i.  264,  265 

Reynolds,  Dr.  Richard,  martyr,  i.  304, 
311,  432-5,  437,  478,  503  ;  ii.  4, 
6,  24 

Rheines's  shop  in  St.  Paxil's  Church- 
yard, ii.  162 

Rice.     See  Ap  Rice 

Rich,  Hugh,  Observant  Friar,  ii.  48 

Riche,  Richard,  the  King's  Solicitor 
(afterwards  Chancellor  of  the 
Augmentations),  i.429, 481 ,  493-5  ; 
ii.  34,  122,  450-4,  465 

Richard  II.,  King,  i.  20,  42,  43,  47, 
120,  136,  261,  267 

Richard  III.,  King,  i.  279 

Richmond,  Observants  of,  ii.  48,  49 

Ricot, ,  of  Sion  Monastery,  ii.  25,  26 

Ridley,  Dr.  Lancelot,  ii.  359,  365, 
368-9,  371 

Ridley,    Nicholas,    Bishop   of   London 
(1550-3),  i.  320,  326.  400 
as  one  of  the  six  preachers  at  Canter- 
bury, ii.  359 


Rigge,   Dr.  Robert,  Chancellor  of  Ox- 
ford, i.  22-4 
Rinck,  Hermann,  of  Cologne,  i.  570  n. ; 

ii.  235-6 
Risby,  Richard,  Observant  Friar,  ii.  48 
Robinson,  Dr.,  ii.  449 
Rochester,    John,   Carthusian    martj^r, 

ii.  16,  30,  33-6 
Rochester,  Bishops  of.     See  Fisher,  J. 

(1504-35)  ;  Hilsey,  John  (1535-9) 
Rochester  Cathedral,  ii.  212 
Rochford,      George,      viscount,     Anne 

Boleyn's  brother,  i.  446 
Rogers,   John,    editor  of    "Matthew's 

Bible,"  ii.  281 
Rokycana  of  Prague,  i.  165 
Rolle,  Richard,  of  Hampole,  i.  113 
Rome,  a  monk  called,  i.  177 
Rome,  Church  of,  and  secular  powers, 

i.  289-91 
Rome  : — 

Court  of,  i.  136,  249 
bulls   from,  arrested,  i.    140  ;     for- 
bidden, i.  421 
St.  Thomas'  Hospital  at,  i.  132 
tribunal  oi  [curia  Roviana),  i.  291-3 
Roo,  John,  Serjeant,  i.  517,  519 
Roods  in  churches,  ii.  434 
Roper,    Margaret,    Sir  Thomas   More's 

daughter,  i.   437,  460,    470,   472- 

474,  499-501  ;  ii.  6 
Roper,  William,  More's  son-in-law,   i. 

457,  459,  460,  465-6,  471 
Roy,   William,    friar,    i.    528;  ii.    94, 

164,  227,  236 
Rugge,  W.      See  Repps 
Rushbroke,  William,  i.  346-8,  353-6 
Russell,  John,  Lord,  afterwards  Earl  of 

Bedford,  ii.  403,  418,  421 
Russell,  John,  friar,  i.  130-1 
Russell,  William,  Warden  of  the  Grej' 

Friars,  London,  i.  132-4,  145 

Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  ii.  340,  373-4. 
377,  381,  385-6,  390,  427,  476 
heresies  touching  the,   i.  274,  407  ; 

ii.  335,  381 
Frith's  book  against  the,  i.  415 
Sacraments,    the    Seven,   ii.    321,  323, 

325,  353,  355 
Sacraraentaries,  ii.  335,  337.     See  also 

Anabaptists 
Sagar,    Stephen,    Abbot  of  Hailes,   ii. 

98,  212 
St.  Alban's  Abbey,  ii.  98,  212 
false  miracle  at,  exposed,  i.  556-7 
Abbot      of      (unnamed),     269  -  72 

ii.  99 
Abbot  of  (John  Stoke),  ii.  98 


502    LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


St.  Asaph,  Bishops  of.     See  Standish, 
Henry    (1518-35);    Barlow,    W. 
(1536) 
St.  Benet's  Hulme,  Abbey  of,  ii.  104 
St.  David's,  Bishops  of.     See  Patring- 
ton,    Stephen    (1415-17)  ;    Bere, 
John    de    la   (1447-60)  ;    Barlow, 
William  (1536-48) ;  Ferrar,  Robert 
(1548  -  54)  ;       Morgan,       Henry 
(1554-9) 
St.   Earth,    Cornwall,   pilgrimages   to, 

ii.  172 
St.  German,  Christopher,  his  book  on 
TJie  Division  between   the  Spirit- 
luilty  and  the  Temporalty,  i.  276, 
308,  449,  537-9 
his  Doctor  and  Student,  i.  538-9 
his  Dialog  us  de  fundavientis  legum 

Anglie  et  de  Conscientia,  i.  538 
his  Salem  and  Bizance,  i.  539 
St.  Giles's  Fields,  i.  80,  83 
St.  John,  Sir  W.  Paulet,  Lord,  ii.  422 
Lord  Great  Master   of  the    House- 
hold  (1546),    ii.   465.     {See   also 
Paulet) 
St.jLeger,  prebendary  of  Canterbury, 

'  ii.  399 
St.    Michael's    Mount,   pilgrimages    to, 

ii.  173 
St.  Patrick's  Purgatory,  ii.  64 
St.  Paul's.     See  London 
Salcot  (or  Capon),  John,  Abbot  of  St. 
Benet's      Hulme,     afterwards     of 
Hyde,     then    Bishop    of    Bangor 
(1534-9),  then  of  Salisbury  (1539- 
1557),  ii.  104,  239,  240,  307,  327, 
353,  390,  422 
Salisbury,  Bishops  of.      See,  Ayscough, 
William   (1438-50)  ;    Campeggio, 
L.  (1524-34) ;  Shaxton,  N.  (1535- 
1539) ;  Salcot,  John  (1539-57) 
Cathedral,  ii.  340 
election  of  a  dean  at,  i.  253 
Salisbury,     Margaret,      Countess      of, 

mother  of  Cardinal  Pole,  ii.  182 
Salt,  Robert,  Carthusian,  ii.  38,  39 
Salter,  Thomas,  Carthusian,  ii.  17 
Henry,  Prior  of  Coxford,  ii.  100 
William,  "one  of  the  King's  beads- 
men," ii.  370,  397-8 
Sampson,  Richard,  Bishop  of  Chichester 
(1536-43),  ii.  168,  195,  216,  289, 
307,  321,  333,  442 
as    Dean    of    Windsor    (1534),    ii. 
387-8 
Sanctuary,  rights  of,  limited,  1.  280 
Sanders,    Nicholas,    historian    of   The 

Anglican  Schism,  ii.  71 
Sandes,  Lady  Margery,  ii.  63 


Sandes,  Lord,  Henry  VIH.'s  Chamber- 
lain, ii.  5 
Sandwich,  William.     See  Gardiner 
Sandwich  haven.  iSee  Tenterdeu  Steeple 
Sarpi's     History    of    the    Council   of 

Trent,  i.  330 
Savoy,  Amadeus,  Duke  of,  elected  Pope 

at  Basel,  i.  169 
Saxony,  George,  Duke  of,  ii.  214 
John  Frederic,  Duke  of.  Elector,  ii. 
175-9,  183,  185-6,  188,  213,  216, 
314-15,  318-19 
his  Vice-Chancellor.      See  Burchart 
his  wife,  Sibylla,  ii.  183 
Sawtre,  or  Chatrys,  William,  burnt,  i. 

49-52,  58,  63 
Sawyer,  Thomas,  ii.  392 
Scales,    Thomas,    eighth   Lord    (1418- 

1460),  i.  234 
Scarle,  John,  Chancellor  of  Henry  IV. , 

i.  89 
Schism,  the  Great,  i.  10,  62 
Schmalkalden,  Diet  at,  ii.    177,    315, 

319 
Schott,  John,  of  Strasburg,  printer,  ii. 

236 
Scory,    John,    Bishop    of    Chichester 
(1552-3),  i.  320 
as  preacher  at  Canterbury,  ii.  365, 
368-9,  371-2 
Scottish  friar,  a,  before  the  Council,  ii, 

443-5 
Scottowe,  Thomas,  Prior  of  St.  Benet's 

Hulme,  ii.  104 
Scotus.     See  Duns 

Scriven    (or    Scryven),    Thomas,    Car- 
thusian, ii.  38,  39 
Scrope,  Richard,  Archbishop  of   York 

(1398-1405),  i.  42 
Scrope,    of    Masham,   Lord,    his    con- 
spiracy against  Henry  V.,  i.  85 
Scryven.     See  Scriven 
Sebastian,  an  Observant  Friar,  ii.  49 
Seckendorff 's  Commentarius  de  Luther- 

anismo,  ii.  316 
Selden's  Table  Talk,  ii.  44 
Series,     Robert,     vicar     of     Lenham, 
preacher   at    Canterbury,  ii.  369, 
370,  275-6,  378,  397,  399 
Seymour,    Edward,    Earl    of   Hertford 
(afterwards  Duke  of  Somerset  and 
Protector),  ii.  422 
Seymour,  Jane,  third  Queen  of  Henry 

VIII.,  ii.  107-9,  224,  276 
Seymour,  Thomas,  Lord,  brother  of  the 

Protector  Somerset,  i.  319 
Sforza,  Ludovico,  Duke  of  Milan,  274 

Shadworth,    ,  of  London,   i.  151, 

152 


INDEX 


503 


Shakespeare,  ii.  41S 

Sharpe,  Jack,  of  Wigmoresland  (Wm. 

Maundevyle  or  Perkyns),  i.  160, 

161 
Shaw,  Dr.,  i.  267 
Shaxton,  Nicholas,  ii.  28 

Bishop  of  Salisbury  (1535-9),  i.  307, 

ii.  88,  89,  129  «.,  195,  197,  206- 

208,  213,  222,  282,  307,  321,  340, 

401,  445,  449,  450-1,  454,  466 
Sheen     Priory     (Carthusian),     ii.     48, 

382  n. 
Sherbounie,       Robert,       Bishop       of 

Chichester  (1507-36),  ii.  20 
Sherbourue,    William,     priest    of    the 

Lady     Chapel     at     Woburn,    ii. 

134-6 
Shether,  Edmund,  preacher  at  Canter- 
bury, ii.  369,  370,  397-400 
Sholden,    Sir    Thomas,    curate    of,   ii. 

392 
Shoreditch,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172 
Shrewsbury  to  be  a  bishopric,  ii.  212 
Shrewsbury,     Francis    Talbot,    eighth 

Earl  of  (1538-60),  ii.  422 
Sigismund,  the  Emperor,  i.  122-4,  164, 

166,  167 
Simnel,  Lambert,  i.  273 
Simons,  William,  a  lawyer,  ii.   385-6, 

389,  390,  401,  405 
Singleton,  Robert,  ii.  380,  382 
Sion   Monastery,   i.    432  ;    ii.    24,  25, 

28-30,  48,  49 
Six  Articles,  Act  of  the  (1539),  i.  314, 

315,  319  ;  ii.  193-207,  209,  210, 

221,    222,    224,    226,    287,    290, 

346,  357,   373,  383,    386-7,   404, 

410,  427,  445,  449,  456,  476 
modified,  ii.  410 
Skipp,    John,     Bishop     of    Hereford, 

(1539-52),  ii.  353 
Skirlaw,   Walter,  Bishop  of  Durham, 

i.  126,  172-4,  176-83 
Smith,  Agnes,  a  nun  of  Sion,  ii.  29 
Smith,  Dr.  [Richard],  of  Oxford,  i.  360 
Smith,   Thomas,    Clerk    of  Council   to 

Katharine  Howard,  ii.  290 
Smith,  William,  of  Leicester,  i.  41 
Smithfield.     See  Loudon 
Smyth,  Dame  Agnes,  ii.  80  n. 
Smyth,   John,   of  Westacre,   his  wife, 

ii.  106 
Smyth,  Thomas,  priest,  i.  128 
Suede,  Dr.,  vicar  of  Rye,  ii.  332 
Snowball,   William,    and  Margaret  his 

wife,  ii.  404,  407 
Somerset,  Edward  Seymour,  Duke  of. 

Protector,  i.  318-20  ;  ii.  82,  202, 

382  n. 


Sophia,    Queen   of  Wenceslaus  VI.    of 

Bohemia,  i.  121 
Southampton   (Hampton),    pilgrimages 

to,  ii.  174 
Southwell,  Richard,  ii.  105,  465 
Southwell,     Robert,    Attorney   of  the 

Court  of  Augmentations,   ii.  115- 

118,  121-2,  132,  465 
South  wick.  Our  Lady  of,  ii.  127 
Spelman,    Sir    Henry,    his   History  of 

Sacrilege,  ii.  82,  94 
Stafford,  John,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury (1443-52),  i.  229 
Standish,  Dr.  Henry,  i.  282,  283 

Bishop  of  St.  Asa])h  (1518-35),  i.  438 
Stanley,    Thomas,    first    Lord    Stanley 

(1456-9),  i.  234 
Stanley,  Sir  William,  te7np.  Elizabeth, 

ii.  71 
Starnolde.     See  Sternhold 
Stepney,  Cromwell's  house  at,  ii.  10 
Sternhold  (Sternall,  Starnolde),  Thomas 

ii.  377-8,  407 
Stokes,  Peter,  friar,  i.  21-3,  27 
Stokesley,    John,    Bishop    of    London 

(1530-9),  i.  409,  479  ;  ii.  25,  26, 

28,  51,   167,  180,  195,  210,  237, 

268-71,  279,  280,  307,  321-2,  327 
Stonham,   Thomas,  third  Prior  of  St. 

Benet's  Hulme,  ii.  104 
Stookes  junior,  ii.  253 
Story,  Sir  Richard,  i.  41,  43 
Stow,  John,  the  Chronicler,  ii.  131 
Strype,  John,  writings  of,  ii.  268-9 
Submission  of  the  clergy,  i.  302,  389, 

420,  448,  450 
Sudbury,  Simon,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 

bury(1375-81),i.l7(andM.),19,21 
Suffolk,  Charles  Brandon,  Duke  of,  i. 

292,  381  ;  ii.  196  n.,  422,  452 
his  daughters,  ii.  451 
his    widow,    Katharine  Willoughby, 

Duchess  of  Suff'olk,  ii.  452,  460  n. 
Suffolk,  William  de  la  Pole,  Duke  of 

(ob.  1450),  i.  228 
Supplication  of  the  Commons  against 

the  clergy,  i.  300-302,  389,  448-9 
Supremacy,  Royal,  i.  506  ;  ii.  52 
acknowledged  by  the  clergy,  i.  300, 

388-9,  403,  420  ;  ii.  159 
first  Act  of,  i.  313,  475-7  ;  ii.  3,  17 
enforced,  i.  421,  424  ;  ii.  47,  411 
Elizabethan  Act  of,  i.  332 
Supreme   Head,   title  of,   i.   421,   429, 
432-3,  477,  482-3,  486-7,  489,  491 
Sussex,  Countess  of,  ii.  452 
Sutton,  a  clergyman,  i.  349,  350 
Swynderby,  William,  career  of,  i.  28- 

38,  42,  118 


504    LOLLARDY   AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Taborites  of  Bohemia,  i.  124,  165 
Tacknal,  John,  ii.  392 
Taverner,  Richard,  his  Bible,  ii.  285 
Taylor,  Dr.  John,  afterwards  (1552-3) 

Bishop  of  Lincoln,  ii.  165,  166 
Taylor    (or    Cardniaker),     Dr.     John, 

vicar  of  St.  Bride's,  ii.  443-5 
Taylor,  William,  heretic,  i.  127,   128, 

186,  199 
Tenterden     Steeple,     Goodwin    Sands, 

and  Sandwich  haven,  i.  576 
Tenterden,  seditious  sermon  at,  ii.  441 

the  preacher  examined,  445 
Testwood,  Robert,   of  the  choir  of  St. 

G.'or'Te's  Chapel,    ii.    377-8,  384, 

387-9 
Teutonic  knights,  i.  186 
Thaxsted,  Thomas,  cellarer  of  Wymond- 

ham,  ii.  98 
Thetford,  priory  and  nunnery,  Norfolk, 

ii.  96 
Thirlby,     Thomas,     Bishop,     first     of 

Westminster    (1540-50),    then    of 

Norwich    (1550-4),    then    of   Ely 

(1554-8),  ii.  289,  352-3 
Thomas,     William,     author     of      The 

Pur/rim,  ii.  141  u. 
Thorn  ham,  Mr.,  i.  486 
Thornton,  William,  i.  486 
Thorpe,   William,   his    examination,   i. 

57-60 
Throckmorton,  Lionel,  ii.  427  n. 
Thurgarton,  Shrine  of  St.  Ethelburg  at, 

ii.  114 
Timperley,  Mr.,  of  Hintlesham,  i.  345 
Tiptoft,   John,   Earl   of  Worcester  {ob. 

1470),  i.  265-7 
Tofer,    John,    parson  of  St.    George's, 

Canter b\iry,  ii.  360 
Topley,  Thomas,  friar,  ii.  250 
Tornaye  (or  Torner),  of  Calais,  ii.  341-2 
Tower   of   Lou<lou,   i.    407,   425,   432, 

437,  464,  468,  471,  473,  475,  480, 

494;  ii.    12,  21,   157,   182,  289, 

346,  416,  417,  421-3,  445,  456 
Constable    of.       See    Kingston,    Sir 

William 
LicTiteuant  of.      See  Walsingham,  Sir 

Edmund     (1535)  ;     Knyvet,     Sir 

Anthony  (1546) 
Tower  Hill,  i.  159,  171,  487  ;  ii.  21 
Townsend,  George,  preljendary,  editor 

of  Foxe,  i.  346,  351-4 
Tracy,  Richard,  ii.  145 
Trafford,  William,  Carthusian,  ii.  26 
made  Prior  of  the  London  Charter- 
house, lb. 
and  surrenders  it,  ii.  37-9 
Transam,  Father.  MS.  of,  ii.  11 


Transubstantiation ,    i.    321  ;    ii.    203, 

356,  357 
Treasons,  statute  of;  i.  424-5,  476,  480, 

482  ;  ii.  52 
Tregonwell,  Dr.  John,  i.  429 
Trent,    Council    of,    i.    331  ;    ii.    325, 

413,  421,  430,  431,  462-4 
Trumpington,  Thomas,  i.  94 
Trussel,  Sir  Thomas,  i.  40 
Tunstall,  Cuthbert,  Bishop  of  London 
(1522-30),    of   Durham    (1530-52 
and    1553-9),    i.    320,    367,   389, 
479,   529  ;    ii.    12,    51,   76,    166, 
195,  227-8,  230,  232-4,  237,  250, 
443,  474-5 
Turks,  the,  i.  256,  290 
Turmyn  (or  Baker),  Richard,  heretic, 

i.  88,  89,  90 
Turner,  Richard,  of  Chartham,  preacher, 

ii.  407-9 
Tyburu,  i.  438,  461,  487-8  ;  ii.  12,  21, 

412 
Tyler,  Wat,  rebellion  of,  i.  10,  16,  21 
Tyndale  (or  Huchyu),  William,  i.  307, 
308,  337,  380,  387-8,  406-7,  409, 
417,    517,    540,    572-3,     576-8 ; 
ii.  164,  227,  232,   236,  257,  259, 
264-6,  271 
his  lYeia  Testament,  i.  105,  307,  311, 
328,  366-71,  394-5,   406  n.,  407, 
510,  515,  517,  .531,545,  567,  569, 
570,  576  ;    ii.   227-44,  248,  256, 
261,  281,  298,  461,  478 
his  First  E2nstk  of  St.  John,  i.  527 
his    Five   Books    of  Moses   (Penta- 
teuch),   i.    527,    530  ;    ii.    243-4, 
248,  257,  261,  270,  281 
his  Introduction  to  St.  Pa-uVs  Epistle 

[to  the  Romans],  i.  527  ;  ii.  341 
his  Jonas,  i.  528 

his   Obedience  of  a  Christian  Man, 
i.  371-5,  394-5,  527,  569,  576  ; 
ii.  137,  231,  244 
which  pleased  Henry  VHI.,  i.  379 
his  Practyse  of  Prelates,  i.  375-9,  529 
which  offended  Henry  VIII.,  379, 
387 
his  Ansxver  to   Sir    Thomas  Move's 
Dialogue,  i.  524,  528,  532-4 
More's  Confutation  of  it,  525 
his    Wicked  Mammon,   i.    527,  569, 

570,  576  ;  ii.  231,  2-14 
his    translation    of    the    first    two 

Gospels,  ii.  227 
his  books  burned,  ii.  260 
Tyrwit,  Lady,  ii.  456 

Ulrick  of  Zynaim,  i.  165 

Unction.     See  Extreme  Unction 


INDEX 


505 


Underbill,     Edward,     "the    hot    gos- 
peller," ii.  209 
Uniformity,  Acts  of,  i.  320,  332 
Universities,    opinions    of,    on    Henry 

VIII.'s  marriage,  i.  295-6,  387 
Urban  IV.,  Pope,  ii.  144  n. 
Urban  V.,  Pope,  i.  10 
Urban  VI.,  Pope,  i.  10 
Utraqnists  of  Bohemia,  i.  124 
Utrecht,  Treaty  of  (1546),  ii.  432 
Uvedale,  John,  ii.  288,  299 

Van  Emmerson,  Margaret,  ii.  257 
Vandois  (Waldenses),  the,  ii.  421 
Venice,  libraries  of,  i.  296 
Vesalius,  Archbishop  of  Lund,  ii.  192 
Visitation  of  monasteries,  ii.  31,  32 
Vitovt,  Duke  of  Lithuania,  i.  186 
Vorstermann,  Dutch  engraver,  ii.  238 
Voysey,  John,  Bishop  of  Exeter  (1519- 
1551  and  1553-4),  ii.  332 

Wadloe,    a   cursitor   of   Chancery,   ii. 

427  n. 
Walden,  Thomas  Netter  of.    See  Netter 
Waldenses.      See  Vaudois 
Wales,  priests  and  their  concubines  in, 

i.  263-4,  573 
Walker,  Mr.,  i.  349 
Walker,  Richard,  i.  125,  126 
Wallingford,   William,    Abbot    of    St. 

Albans,  ii.  99 
Walpole,  Thomas,  ii.  290 
Walsiugbam,  Our  Lady  of,  i.  558,  561  ; 

ii  126,  127,  146,  149,  150,  176 
Walsingham,  Sir  Edmund,   Lieutenant 

of  the    Tower    (1535),    i.    470-1, 

482,  502  ;  ii.  12 
Waltham,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172 
Walworth,  James,  Carthusian  martyr, 

ii.  30,  33,  34,  36 
Warham,     William,     Archbishop      of 

Canterbury     (1503-32),     i,    294, 

302,  303,  385,  389,   390,   442-4, 

446,  450,  453,  532-3  ;  ii.  6,   227, 

229-31,  235,  238-40 
Warner,  Isabella,  ii.  101 
Warwick,  Earl  of.      See  Dudley,  John 
Wathe,  John,  forger,  i.  131 
Wawe,  William,  thief,  i.  146 
Waytestathe,  Richard,  i.  41 
Webster,  Augustine,  Prior  of  Axholme, 

Carthusian  martyr,  i.  426,  435-7 
Weldon,  Thomas,  ii.  377,  404,  407 
Wells,  Alexander,  ii.  333 
Wenceslaus  VI.  of  Bohemia,  i.  121,  123 
Wendy,  Dr.,  ii.  458,  459 
Wentworth,    Sir  Roger,   his    daughter 

Anne,  i.  659,  560 


Wentworth,  Thomas,  Lord,  ii.  160 
West,  Nicholas,   Bishop  of  Ely  (1515- 

1533),  i.  444 
Westacre,   Norfolk,   priory  of,  ii.  105, 

106,  116-19,  121 
Westcote,  John,  ii.  407 
Westminster  Abbey,  Commons  at,  i.  142 
Abbot  of,  i.  142 
Bishopric  of,   created,  ii.   212,  216, 

289,  353 
divines  at  (in  1537),  ii.  320 
Weston,  Dr.,  ii.  430 
Whalley,  John,  ii.  12,  1.3,  17,  19 
Whethamstede,    John,     Abbot    of    St. 

Alban's,  i.  237  ;  ii.  98 
Whitby,  Abbot  of,  ii.  77 
Whitchurch  (or  Whitecburch),  Edward, 

printer,  ii.  272,  274,  282,  288 
White,  Chi'istopher,  tried   for  heresy, 

ii.  446,  449,  450,  466 
White,  George  (or  Edward  ?),  i.  486 
White  (or  Wliyte),  Richard,  of  Wattis- 

ham,  i.  345,  347-8,  355 
White,  William,  heretic,  i.  129, 157, 187 

burnt,  i.  158 
Whitechapel,  preaching  bricklayer  of, 

iL  208,  210 
Whitehall  (or  York  Place),  ii.  165,  415, 

458 
Whitford, ,  of  Sion  Monastery,  ii. 

25 
Whiting,  Richard,  last  Abbot  of  Glas- 
tonbury, i.  342  ;  ii.  211 
Whittington  College,  London,  i.  223 
Whyteney,  Master,  ii.  69,  70 
Wiche,  Richard,  heretic,  i.  126,  171 

his  story,  172-85 
Willesden   (Wyldon),    a  place  of   pil- 

gi-image,  i.  394,  562  ;  ii.  173 
Williams,     John,     Master    of     Henry 

VIII.'s  Jewels,  ii.  133-4 
Willoughby,  l)r.,  vicar  of  Chilham,  ii. 

375-6,  378-9,  400 
Willoughby  of  Eresby,  William,  Lord 

{ob.  1525),  ii.  452 
Wilson,  Dr.  Nicholas,  i.  464  ;  ii.  163, 

289,  435 
Wilson,  Richard,  i.  482 
Wiltshire,    Thomas    Boleyn,    Earl    of, 

father  of  Anne  Boleyn,  i.  486 
Winchconibe  Abbey,  ii.  63 
Winchcombe,      Abbot      of      (Richard 

Kidderminster),  i.  282 
Winchelsea,  Dr.  Thomas,  i.  133,  134 
Winchester,  Bishops  of.     See  Beaufort, 

Henry  (1405-47)  ;   Fox,  Richard, 

(1501-28)  ;      Gardiner,      Stephen 

(1531-50    and    1553-5);     Ponet, 

John  (1551-3) 


5o6  LOLLARDY  AND  THE  REFORMATION 


Winchester  Cathedral  altered,  ii.  212 

Winchester,  scholars  of,  ii.  267 

Windsor,  Andrew,  tirst  Lord,  ii.  28 

Windsor  heretics,  the,  ii,  377-8,  383- 
391,  401-2,  404-5,  476 

Windsor,  pilgrimages  to,  ii.  172,  389 
a  surprise  at,  ii.  388 

WingKeld,  William,  Prior  of  Westacre, 
ii.  106 

Wisdom,  John,  ii.  379 

Wisdom,  Robert,  clerk,  ii.  379-82,  446 

Wismar,  on  the  Baltic,  ii.  186 

Witham,  Somerset,  Carthusian  priory, 
ii.  40 

Wittenberg,  ii.  31,5 
articles  of,  ii.  316,  318 

Woburn  Abbey,  its  surrender,  ii.  133 
what   took  place   within  the  abbey 

during  its  last  years,  134-40 
the  Abbot  hanged  with  others,  140 

Woburn  (or  Barnes),  Ralph,  Sub-prior 
of  Woburn,  ii.  137,  140 

Wodelow,  Alice,  a  nun,  i.  54 

Wolfe,  William,  ii.  349 

Wolnian,  Benet  (or  John  Benet,  wool- 
man),  a  Lollard,  i.  93 

Wolsey,  Thomas,  Cardinal(1515),  Arch- 
bishop of  York  (1,514-30),  i.  279, 
283,  299,  376,  387-8,  394,  396, 
406  »^.,  413,  439,  445,  517-19, 
529,  570  n.  ;  ii.  72,  80,  90,  94, 
95,  158,  197,  236,  253,  255-6, 
264 
his  colleges,  ii.  58,  94,  256,  285 

Wood,  John  a,  Sir  T.  More's  servant, 
i.  467 

Worcester,  Bishops  of.  See  Morgan, 
Philip  (1419-25);  Ghinucci, 
Jerome  (1523-34) ;  Latimer,  Hugh 
(1535-9)  ;  Bell,  John  (1539-43)  ; 
Heath,  Nicholas  (1543-51); 
Hooper,  John  (1552-3) 

Worcester  Cathedral  Priory,  ii.  60,  61, 
212 
image  of  the  Virgin  at,  ii.  149,  172 

Works,  Good,  ii.  353,  355 


Wotton,  Dr.  Nicholas,  ii.  187,  299  w. 

Wriothesley,  Charles,  Chronicle  of,  ii. 
205,  380 

Wriothesley,  Sir  Thomas,  ii.  331 

Lord  Chancellor,  ii.  443,  448,  450, 
453-.5,  460,-162 

Wyatt,  Sir  Thomas,  the  elder,  ii.  182, 
186,  331 

Wyatt,  Sir  Thomas,  the  younger,  his 
rebellion,  i.  326 

Wycliffe,  John,  and  his  teaching,  i.  7, 
8,  10-15,  17-19,  21,  22,  27,  34, 
36,  40,  45,  46,  55,  56,  61,  63-6, 
83,  100,  117-18,  121,  150,  159, 
160,  165,  172,  180,  185,  189-201, 
288,  337,  574  ;  ii.  313,  335 
his  writings,  i.  62  ;  ii.  461 
his  Bible,  i.  52,  101-13,  116,  208, 

214,  309,  328,  366-7,  370,  545 
his  Dialogjis,  i.  225 
his  bones  burnt,  i.  156 

Wye,  Robert,  ii.  70 

Wykeham,  William  of,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, i.  23 

Wymondham  Abbey,  Norfolk,  ii.  96-8 

York,  ii.  74 

Cathedral,  i.  248-9,  260,  279 
diocese,  ii.  72 

shrine  of  St.  William  at,  ii.  114,  172 
St.  Mary's  monastery,  i.  247 
York,    Archbishops    of.       See   Scrope, 
Richard  (1398-1405);  Kemp,  John 
(1426-31);  Wolsey,  Thomas  (1514- 
1530)  ;  Lee,  Edward  (1531-44) 
province  of,  ii.  78,  84 
Convocation  of,  i.  300,  389,  462 
York,   House  of,   its    influence   on  the 

Church,  i.  244 
York  Place.     See  Whitehall 
Yorkshire  rebellion,  ii.  93,  107 

Zizka,   the  Bohemian   general,   i.   123, 

124,  144 
Zwinglius,  i.  408,  530 
Zwola,  Conzo  de.     See  Conzo 


COERECTION 

I  AM  sorry  to  find  that  in  Vol.  II.  p.  308  I  have  made  a  misstatement  about  the 
Convocation  which  met  at  St.  Paul's  on  the  9th  June  1536.  I  have  said  that  it 
was  a  special  Convocation,  in  which  the  clergy  of  the  Northern  Province  sat  along 
with  those  of  the  Southern.  This,  on  further  consideration,  I  believe  not  to  have 
been  the  case,  though  the  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  Bishop  of  Durham  signed 
the  Ten  Articles  elaborated  in  that  assembly.  Wake,  in  his  State  of  the  Church, 
p.  491,  finds  no  evidence  in  the  registers  that  the  Convocation  of  York  was  sum- 
moned at  this  time,  although  he  believes  that  the  bishops  of  that  province,  and 
possibly  some  select  persons  of  their  clergy,  assisted  at  the  framing  of  the  Articles. 


Printed  by  R.  &  R.  Clark,  Limited,  Edinburgh. 


MACMILLAN  AND  CO.'S  NEW  BOOKS. 

EARLY  CHURCH  HISTORY  (TO  A.D.  313).  By  Henry 
Melvill  Gwatkin,  M.A.,  Dixie  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical 
History  in  the  University  of  Cambridge,  Author  of 
"  Selections  from  Early  Writers  Illustrative  of  Church 
History  to  the  Time  of  Constantino. "     Two  Vols.      8vo. 

THE  ANCIENT  GREEK  HISTORIANS.  (Harvard 
Lectures.)  By  J.  B.  Bury,  Litt.D.,  LL.D.,  Eegius  Professor 
of  Modern  History  in  the  University  of  Cambridge.     8vo. 

SOCIAL  LIFE  AT  ROME  IN  THE  AGE  OF  CICERO. 

By  W.  Warde  Fowler,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  Lincoln  College, 
Oxford,  Author  of  "  The  Eoman  Festivals  of  the  Republican 
Period,"  etc.     With  Maps  and  Plans.     8vo. 

CAESAR'S  COMMENTARIES  ON  THE  GALLIC  WAR. 

Translated  into  English  by  T.  RiCE  Holmes,  Hon.  Litt.D., 
Dublin.      Crown  8vo. 

STUDIES:    RELIGIOUS,    PHILOSOPHICAL,   SOCIAL, 

AND   CONTROVERSIAL.      By  Frederic  Harrison. 

In  Four  Vols.     Extra  Crown  8vo.     Volume  IV.  :  Realities 

and  Ideals,  Social,  Political,  Literary,  and  Artistic.     7s.  6d. 

net. 

Already  Published. 

Vol.     I.  The  Creed  of  a  Layman ;  Apologia  pro  Fide 
Mea.      7s.  6d.  net. 

Vol.    II.  The  Philosophy  of  Common  Sense.  7s.6d.net. 

Vol.  HI.  National  and  Social  Problems.     7s.  6d.  net. 

WILLIAM  HAIG  BROWN,  SOMETIME  MASTER  OF 
CHARTERHOUSE.  A  Short  Biographical  Memoir.  By 
some  of  His  Pupils.  Edited  by  Harold  E.  Haig  Brown. 
With  Portrait.      8vo. 

MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,  Ltd.,  LONDON. 


MACMILLAN  AND  CO.'S  NEW  BOOKS. 

ORIGIN  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  MORAL 
IDEAS.  By  Edward  Westermarck,  Ph.D.,  Lecturer  on 
Sociology  at  the  University  of  Helsingfors,  and  in  the 
University  of  London.     In  Two  Vols.     8vo.     Vol.  IL 

Already  Published. — Volume  I.   1 4s.  net. 

THE   PHILOSOPHY  OF  GASSENDI.      By  G.  S.  Brett. 

8vo. 

HERCULANEUM:  PAST,  PRESENT,  AND  FUTURE. 

By  Charles  Waldstein,  Litt.D.,  Ph.D.,  L.H.D.,  Slade 
Professor  of  Fine  Art  in  the  University  and  Fellow  of 
King's  College,  Cambridge,  and  Leonard  Shoobridge, 
M.A.,  Balliol  College,  Oxford.  With  Coloured  Frontis- 
piece, numerous  Photogravure  Plates,  and  other  Illustra- 
tions and  Maps.     8vo. 

EARTHWORK  OF  ENGLAND.  Prehistoric,  Koman, 
Saxon,  Danish,  Norman,  and  Mediaeval.  By  A.  Hadrian 
Allcroft,  M.A.  Illustrated  with  upwards  of  Two 
Hundred  and  Twenty  Plans,  Sections,  etc.     Svo. 

OXFORD  LECTURES  ON  POETRY.  By  A.  C.  Bradley, 
LL.D.,  Professor  of  Poetry  in  the  University  of  Oxford. 
Svo. 

A  HISTORY  OF  ENGLISH  PROSODY  FROM  THE 
TWELFTH  CENTURY  TO  THE  PRESENT  DAY. 

By  George  Saintsbury,  M.A.,  Oxon.,  Hon.  LL.D.  Aberd., 
Hon.  D.Litt.  Dresd.,  Professor  of  Rhetoric  and  English 
Literature  in  the  University  of  Edinburgh.  Three  Vols.  Svo. 
Volume  II.     From  Shakespeare  to  Crabbe. 

Already  Published. 
Vol.  I.  From  the  Origins  to  Spenser.     10s.  net. 

MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,  Ltd.,  LONDON. 


